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...
CESTAT ruled in favor of delivery agents, setting aside penalties u/ss 112(a) and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962. The agents, who handled a sealed FCL container from Jebel Ali to Haldia, were unaware of the cigarette contents due to the "shipper's load and count" clause in the Bill of Lading. The tribunal found no evidence of aiding or abetting smuggling since the agents merely facilitated proper delivery with intact seals. Their role as intermediaries without knowledge of container contents precluded liability under customs regulations. The tribunal emphasized that mere delivery agency functions, without proven knowledge of illegal contents, cannot attract penalties for customs violations. Appeal allowed.
CESTAT ruled in favor of delivery agents, setting aside penalties u/ss 112(a) and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962. The agents, who handled a sealed FCL container from Jebel Ali to Haldia, were unaware of the cigarette contents due to the "shipper's load and count" clause in the Bill of Lading. The tribunal found no evidence of aiding or abetting smuggling since the agents merely facilitated proper delivery with intact seals. Their role as intermediaries without knowledge of container contents precluded liability under customs regulations. The tribunal emphasized that mere delivery agency functions, without proven knowledge of illegal contents, cannot attract penalties for customs violations. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
