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 a Rs.3,00,000 penalty imposed under s.112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held the appellant was neither owner nor party concerned with carriage or concealment of the foreign-origin garments, which were not covered by s.123 nor notified under s.11. The goods had been subjected to statutory physical examination, cleared on examination, and lawful possession and sale were supported by invoices, GST returns and Bills of Entry; ownership had transferred on sale. The Tribunal found no basis for imposition of s.112(b) penalty on the appellant and quashed the levy; appeal allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside a Rs.3,00,000 penalty imposed under s.112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal held the appellant was neither owner nor party concerned with carriage or concealment of the foreign-origin garments, which were not covered by s.123 nor notified under s.11. The goods had been subjected to statutory physical examination, cleared on examination, and lawful possession and sale were supported by invoices, GST returns and Bills of Entry; ownership had transferred on sale. The Tribunal found no basis for imposition of s.112(b) penalty on the appellant and quashed the levy; appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
