Petition dismissed; petitioner allowed to submit detailed disclosures and documents for re-consideration; notices for 2019-23 may be adjudicated on me...
Confiscation and duty recovery quashed where licensing records show export obligation discharged; customs lacks jurisdiction absent licence annulment ...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10161 to 10180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the Appellant's import of ENABLE 2005-CE under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus was valid. The Tribunal found the item was recognized as an input in the MEPZ LUT renewal of 26 Feb 2013 and thus fell within the SION coverage for the exported product; any non-conformity was procedural. No post-importation conditions of the notification were alleged to be breached. Consequently, confiscation under s.111(o) and penalty under s.112(a)(ii) could not be sustained. Allegations of mis-declaration were unsupported and s.111(m) was not invoked; appeal allowed, order set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the Appellant's import of ENABLE 2005-CE under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus was valid. The Tribunal found the item was recognized as an input in the MEPZ LUT renewal of 26 Feb 2013 and thus fell within the SION coverage for the exported product; any non-conformity was procedural. No post-importation conditions of the notification were alleged to be breached. Consequently, confiscation under s.111(o) and penalty under s.112(a)(ii) could not be sustained. Allegations of mis-declaration were unsupported and s.111(m) was not invoked; appeal allowed, order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
