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 ...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96046 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 held that the customs authorities lacked the legal authority to impose duty liability or confiscate the salvage equipment imported for the MSC Chitra incident. The Customs Act, 1962 provisions for duty assessment and levy are subject to maritime laws governing transit of vessels in distress. As the imported goods were used for salvaging the foreign-going vessel under customs approval, invoking Sections 28, 111(n), 111(o), 114A, and 114AA of the Customs Act to demand duty, confiscation, and penalties was without merit. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside.
The CESTAT held that the customs authorities lacked the legal authority to impose duty liability or confiscate the salvage equipment imported for the MSC Chitra incident. The Customs Act, 1962 provisions for duty assessment and levy are subject to maritime laws governing transit of vessels in distress. As the imported goods were used for salvaging the foreign-going vessel under customs approval, invoking Sections 28, 111(n), 111(o), 114A, and 114AA of the Customs Act to demand duty, confiscation, and penalties was without merit. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
