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 penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act, 1962 for mis-declaration of export goods leading to undue duty drawback benefit. The issue was the admissibility of statements u/s 138B and WhatsApp messages u/s 138C as evidence. The Appellate Tribunal held that statements were inadmissible as witnesses were not examined or offered for cross-examination, violating legal practices. Similarly, WhatsApp messages lacked specific mention of appellant's involvement and were not obtained following the procedure u/s 138C. Consequently, the penalty imposed was deemed legally unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 25 Lakh.
The case involved a penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act, 1962 for mis-declaration of export goods leading to undue duty drawback benefit. The issue was the admissibility of statements u/s 138B and WhatsApp messages u/s 138C as evidence. The Appellate Tribunal held that statements were inadmissible as witnesses were not examined or offered for cross-examination, violating legal practices. Similarly, WhatsApp messages lacked specific mention of appellant's involvement and were not obtained following the procedure u/s 138C. Consequently, the penalty imposed was deemed legally unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 25 Lakh.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
