Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of CESTAT allowed the appeals filed by the noticee-appellants and set aside the impugned order in entirety. The T. noted that the same order of the Commissioner, including the enhancement of assessable value by adding alleged differential freight for part-voyage loading, and the resultant duty demands and penalties under Ss. 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, had already been quashed in earlier connected appeals of the main importers. As there is no stay or reversal of that decision by the SC or any HC, judicial discipline required following it. Since confiscation of the goods had already been annulled, no penalty under S. 112(a) or S. 114AA could survive against the present appellants. All penalties were therefore vacated and the appeals were allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
