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 dismissed the appellant's refund claim, holding that no refund was payable for differential duty and interest on clearances of intravenous fluids where the appellant had availed CENVAT credit and paid duty during the claim period. The Tribunal found the appellant had not challenged the assessed liability by appellate proceedings and had not produced any order setting aside the duty so paid. The Bench held that the law declared by the SC is binding under Article 141, and that decisions cited by the appellant were not binding precedents on the statutory regime under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004; accordingly the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.
The CESTAT dismissed the appellant's refund claim, holding that no refund was payable for differential duty and interest on clearances of intravenous fluids where the appellant had availed CENVAT credit and paid duty during the claim period. The Tribunal found the appellant had not challenged the assessed liability by appellate proceedings and had not produced any order setting aside the duty so paid. The Bench held that the law declared by the SC is binding under Article 141, and that decisions cited by the appellant were not binding precedents on the statutory regime under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004; accordingly the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
