Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Restoration of confiscated property during trial under the second proviso to Section 8(8) of the PMLA is controlled by Rule 3A of the 2016 Rules, as amended, which permits consideration only after framing of charge under Section 4. Where charges have not been framed, an application for restoration is premature. The pendency of an appeal against the adjudication order before the statutory appellate forum also bars a course that would trench upon or render the appellate remedy infructuous. Applying these principles, the restoration order was held contrary to the statutory scheme and was set aside.
Restoration of confiscated property during trial under the second proviso to Section 8(8) of the PMLA is controlled by Rule 3A of the 2016 Rules, as amended, which permits consideration only after framing of charge under Section 4. Where charges have not been framed, an application for restoration is premature. The pendency of an appeal against the adjudication order before the statutory appellate forum also bars a course that would trench upon or render the appellate remedy infructuous. Applying these principles, the restoration order was held contrary to the statutory scheme and was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.