Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Imposition of Penalty u/r 26 of CER, 2002 - quantum of penalty - clandestine removal - appellant unknowingly got involved as an employee in the clandestine activity of his employers - the appellant is liable to penalty but at the same time the quantum of penalty imposed is quite high and harsh - penalty reduced to ₹ 2,50,000/- - AT
Imposition of Penalty u/r 26 of CER, 2002 - quantum of penalty - clandestine removal - appellant unknowingly got involved as an employee in the clandestine activity of his employers - the appellant is liable to penalty but at the same time the quantum of penalty imposed is quite high and harsh - penalty reduced to ₹ 2,50,000/- - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.