Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Whether customs duty was payable on re-imported pharmaceuticals cleared for destruction: held that Rule 31, Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, prohibits import of drugs with under 60% residual shelf life except where permitted solely for destruction, and such permission does not itself waive duty at customs. The proper course was assessment and demand of duty at clearance or invocation of section 23 Customs Act for remission by relinquishing title; the adjudicating authority failed to examine whether duty should have been levied or remission claimed. Because permission limited use to destruction, no penalty for illegal import arises; matter remanded for fresh adjudication on duty liability. - CESTAT
Whether customs duty was payable on re-imported pharmaceuticals cleared for destruction: held that Rule 31, Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, prohibits import of drugs with under 60% residual shelf life except where permitted solely for destruction, and such permission does not itself waive duty at customs. The proper course was assessment and demand of duty at clearance or invocation of section 23 Customs Act for remission by relinquishing title; the adjudicating authority failed to examine whether duty should have been levied or remission claimed. Because permission limited use to destruction, no penalty for illegal import arises; matter remanded for fresh adjudication on duty liability. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
