Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
