Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
CESTAT held that the order of absolute confiscation of the impugned goods, earlier directed by the Commr. (Appeals), was unsustainable as the goods had already been re-exported. The appellant produced the Let Export Order dated 07.10.2019 showing re-export, which predated both the Review Order of the Commr. of Customs and the subsequent Revenue appeal. The Tribunal noted that the department had been duly informed of the re-export, yet the Commr. proceeded without considering this material fact. Applying the settled legal principle that confiscation cannot be ordered when goods are no longer available and have not been cleared under bond, CESTAT set aside the absolute confiscation and any consequential directions. The appeal of the assessee was accordingly allowed, and the Revenue's action was held to be unwarranted in law.
CESTAT held that the order of absolute confiscation of the impugned goods, earlier directed by the Commr. (Appeals), was unsustainable as the goods had already been re-exported. The appellant produced the Let Export Order dated 07.10.2019 showing re-export, which predated both the Review Order of the Commr. of Customs and the subsequent Revenue appeal. The Tribunal noted that the department had been duly informed of the re-export, yet the Commr. proceeded without considering this material fact. Applying the settled legal principle that confiscation cannot be ordered when goods are no longer available and have not been cleared under bond, CESTAT set aside the absolute confiscation and any consequential directions. The appeal of the assessee was accordingly allowed, and the Revenue's action was held to be unwarranted in law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
