Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The case involved a dispute regarding the demand of duty on imported inputs used for final products exempted from duty u/s 3 of N/N. 52/2003-Cus. The Tribunal held that demand u/s 28(4) of Customs Act, 1962 with extended period was not sustainable. The appellant's belief in eligibility for Cenvat credit and favorable Tribunal decisions supported the conclusion. The demand for the extended period was set aside, and only duty for the normal period was upheld. The imposition of penalty u/s 114A was deemed legally unsustainable. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.
The case involved a dispute regarding the demand of duty on imported inputs used for final products exempted from duty u/s 3 of N/N. 52/2003-Cus. The Tribunal held that demand u/s 28(4) of Customs Act, 1962 with extended period was not sustainable. The appellant's belief in eligibility for Cenvat credit and favorable Tribunal decisions supported the conclusion. The demand for the extended period was set aside, and only duty for the normal period was upheld. The imposition of penalty u/s 114A was deemed legally unsustainable. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.