Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
The dominant issue was whether refund of excess additional duty of customs could be rejected on the ground that it did not arise from a valid reassessment as required under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 in light of ITC Ltd. The Tribunal held that self-assessment under Section 17, reassessment under Sections 17/128, and amendments/corrections under Sections 149/154 constitute "assessment" for Section 27 purposes, and that a speaking reassessment order had in fact been passed but was ignored by the appellate authority. Consequently, the rejection of the refund was legally unsustainable and was set aside, restoring entitlement to refund. - CESTAT
The dominant issue was whether refund of excess additional duty of customs could be rejected on the ground that it did not arise from a valid reassessment as required under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 in light of ITC Ltd. The Tribunal held that self-assessment under Section 17, reassessment under Sections 17/128, and amendments/corrections under Sections 149/154 constitute "assessment" for Section 27 purposes, and that a speaking reassessment order had in fact been passed but was ignored by the appellate authority. Consequently, the rejection of the refund was legally unsustainable and was set aside, restoring entitlement to refund. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
