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 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order which had imposed a monetary penalty of Rs.50,000 under Regulation 18 of the CBLR, 2013 for alleged breach of Regulation 11(n). The Tribunal found that, although non-compliance with Regulation 11(n) (failure to verify the declared address of the exporter) was established, the Appellant was not shown to have abetted mis-declaration, benefited from, or participated in fraudulent export transactions. In view of absence of culpability in the fraudulent draw-back scheme, the penalty was held improper and untenable; consequential revocation/forfeiture measures imposed against the Appellant were set aside and the appeal was allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order which had imposed a monetary penalty of Rs.50,000 under Regulation 18 of the CBLR, 2013 for alleged breach of Regulation 11(n). The Tribunal found that, although non-compliance with Regulation 11(n) (failure to verify the declared address of the exporter) was established, the Appellant was not shown to have abetted mis-declaration, benefited from, or participated in fraudulent export transactions. In view of absence of culpability in the fraudulent draw-back scheme, the penalty was held improper and untenable; consequential revocation/forfeiture measures imposed against the Appellant were set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
