Where confiscated foreign-origin cigarette packets proposed for e-auction did not comply with mandatory packaging and labelling requirements under COTPA 2003 and the 2014 Amendment Rules, the department could not lawfully release them for home consumption and was required to destroy them; consequently, the bidder's failure to deposit the balance bid amount could not justify forfeiture of the initial deposit. The departmental contention that the 29.03.2017 Circular was inapplicable because the auction was earlier was rejected, as the governing statutory compliance conditions controlled release. Orders rejecting refund were set aside and refund of the deposited amount was directed with 6% interest from deposit to payment. - CESTAT
Where confiscated foreign-origin cigarette packets proposed for e-auction did not comply with mandatory packaging and labelling requirements under COTPA 2003 and the 2014 Amendment Rules, the department could not lawfully release them for home consumption and was required to destroy them; consequently, the bidder's failure to deposit the balance bid amount could not justify forfeiture of the initial deposit. The departmental contention that the 29.03.2017 Circular was inapplicable because the auction was earlier was rejected, as the governing statutory compliance conditions controlled release. Orders rejecting refund were set aside and refund of the deposited amount was directed with 6% interest from deposit to payment. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
