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 allowed the appeal, holding that statements under s.108 of the Customs Act were inadmissible where the procedural safeguards of s.138B were not complied with, and that admission and opportunity for cross-examination are prerequisite to their evidentiary value. The Tribunal further found the proviso to s.3(2) of the Tariff Act inapplicable because both statutory conditions (requirement under the 1976 Act and a s.4A notification) were not simultaneously satisfied; consequently the Commissioner (Appeals)'s reliance on retail price for CVD determination was unsustainable. The impugned order confirming demand under s.28(1) with interest and imposing penalty under s.112(a) was set aside. Appeal allowed.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that statements under s.108 of the Customs Act were inadmissible where the procedural safeguards of s.138B were not complied with, and that admission and opportunity for cross-examination are prerequisite to their evidentiary value. The Tribunal further found the proviso to s.3(2) of the Tariff Act inapplicable because both statutory conditions (requirement under the 1976 Act and a s.4A notification) were not simultaneously satisfied; consequently the Commissioner (Appeals)'s reliance on retail price for CVD determination was unsustainable. The impugned order confirming demand under s.28(1) with interest and imposing penalty under s.112(a) was set aside. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.