Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
A custodian under customs law is liable for pilferage only if imported goods are shown to have been lost or substituted while in its custody. Where sealed containers move on a said-to-contain basis and the examination reports show intact seals, or no tampering, a mere mismatch between the import manifest and the goods found does not prove pilferage or substitution during custody. On the facts, the tribunal found no evidence that the containers were tampered with while with the custodian, so the duty demand raised on custodian liability and the related penalties were unsustainable and were set aside.
A custodian under customs law is liable for pilferage only if imported goods are shown to have been lost or substituted while in its custody. Where sealed containers move on a said-to-contain basis and the examination reports show intact seals, or no tampering, a mere mismatch between the import manifest and the goods found does not prove pilferage or substitution during custody. On the facts, the tribunal found no evidence that the containers were tampered with while with the custodian, so the duty demand raised on custodian liability and the related penalties were unsustainable and were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
