Revenue authority mandates using scheme-specific reversal procedures, not revising original entries, for instrument-based trade/customs benefits effec...
Transaction value under s.15(1) governs unrelated sales; valuation between related parties per Rule 28; consignment note required for unregistered rec...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and directed release of the consignment subject to payment of customs duties. The Tribunal found the PSIC issued by a DGFT-approved PSIA, despite indicating inspection at Duisburg rather than the Bill of Lading's port of loading, sufficiently established that the imported low-nickel turning scrap complied with Para 2.51 of HBP, 2023 (no hazardous, radioactive or explosive content). Consequently, the goods were not liable to confiscation, the redemption fine was set aside, and the penalty imposed under s.112(a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 (₹15,00,000) was quashed. The Tribunal held procedural deficiency in the PSIC did not amount to importation of prohibited goods.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and directed release of the consignment subject to payment of customs duties. The Tribunal found the PSIC issued by a DGFT-approved PSIA, despite indicating inspection at Duisburg rather than the Bill of Lading's port of loading, sufficiently established that the imported low-nickel turning scrap complied with Para 2.51 of HBP, 2023 (no hazardous, radioactive or explosive content). Consequently, the goods were not liable to confiscation, the redemption fine was set aside, and the penalty imposed under s.112(a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 (₹15,00,000) was quashed. The Tribunal held procedural deficiency in the PSIC did not amount to importation of prohibited goods.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.