Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
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 
