Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT allowed the appeal against the imposition of redemption fine u/s 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held that when the exported goods are unavailable, confiscation cannot be ordered, and consequently, no redemption fine can be imposed. The redemption fine is conditional upon the assessee seeking redemption of the confiscated goods by paying the fine. Since the exported rice was unavailable, there was no question of redemption, rendering the redemption fine imposition incorrect and illegal. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal against the imposition of redemption fine u/s 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held that when the exported goods are unavailable, confiscation cannot be ordered, and consequently, no redemption fine can be imposed. The redemption fine is conditional upon the assessee seeking redemption of the confiscated goods by paying the fine. Since the exported rice was unavailable, there was no question of redemption, rendering the redemption fine imposition incorrect and illegal. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.