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 dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) that penalty under s.114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 is inapplicable to the respondent, who was a domestic supplier and neither importer nor exporter. The Tribunal held there was no obligation on the respondent to make customs declarations, and the Revenue failed to establish the statutory elements under s.121 - that goods were smuggled, that such goods were sold, and that seized cash constituted proceeds of smuggling. Further, the Tribunal held authorities lack power to re-determine FOB value of exports; consequently the show-cause proceedings and consequent penalties predicated on re-determined FOB were unsustainable.
CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) that penalty under s.114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 is inapplicable to the respondent, who was a domestic supplier and neither importer nor exporter. The Tribunal held there was no obligation on the respondent to make customs declarations, and the Revenue failed to establish the statutory elements under s.121 - that goods were smuggled, that such goods were sold, and that seized cash constituted proceeds of smuggling. Further, the Tribunal held authorities lack power to re-determine FOB value of exports; consequently the show-cause proceedings and consequent penalties predicated on re-determined FOB were unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
