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...
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 
