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 held that paddy parboiling machinery and driers must be classified under Chapter 8419 rather than Chapter 8437 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, following the binding precedent established by the Larger Bench in Jyoti Sales Corporation case and upheld by the Supreme Court. However, the Tribunal applied the classification change prospectively from 15.05.2014, when Circular No. 924/14/2010-CX was rescinded. For the period prior to 15.05.2014, no duty demand was sustainable as the appellant had legitimately classified products under Chapter 8437 pursuant to the then-valid circular. The impugned orders were modified to confirm proper classification while limiting demand with interest to the period from 15.05.2014 onwards, with penalty and interest for the prior period set aside. Appeals were remanded for demand recomputation.
CESTAT held that paddy parboiling machinery and driers must be classified under Chapter 8419 rather than Chapter 8437 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, following the binding precedent established by the Larger Bench in Jyoti Sales Corporation case and upheld by the Supreme Court. However, the Tribunal applied the classification change prospectively from 15.05.2014, when Circular No. 924/14/2010-CX was rescinded. For the period prior to 15.05.2014, no duty demand was sustainable as the appellant had legitimately classified products under Chapter 8437 pursuant to the then-valid circular. The impugned orders were modified to confirm proper classification while limiting demand with interest to the period from 15.05.2014 onwards, with penalty and interest for the prior period set aside. Appeals were remanded for demand recomputation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.