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...
The CESTAT held that the corrigendum issued for a demand related to shipments dated 10.05.2008 constituted part of the original show cause notice, as adjudication commenced only after its issuance and the appellant's response. However, since the corrigendum was issued beyond the one-year limitation period prescribed under Section 28 of the Customs Act, the demand was time-barred. The Tribunal distinguished this case from instances where an incorrect provision is cited but the claim remains valid, emphasizing that the limitation under Section 28 is strictly one year from the relevant date. Consequently, the Order-in-Original confirming the duty demand with interest on five shipping bills was set aside and the appeal allowed.
The CESTAT held that the corrigendum issued for a demand related to shipments dated 10.05.2008 constituted part of the original show cause notice, as adjudication commenced only after its issuance and the appellant's response. However, since the corrigendum was issued beyond the one-year limitation period prescribed under Section 28 of the Customs Act, the demand was time-barred. The Tribunal distinguished this case from instances where an incorrect provision is cited but the claim remains valid, emphasizing that the limitation under Section 28 is strictly one year from the relevant date. Consequently, the Order-in-Original confirming the duty demand with interest on five shipping bills was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
