Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
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.