Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
Statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act could not be relied on to support undervaluation unless the procedure in section 138B was followed, including examination of the maker, a finding that admission was in the interests of justice, and an opportunity for cross-examination; absent that compliance, the statements were inadmissible. Electronic material retrieved from a laptop was also rejected because the seizure and handling were doubtful, retrieval was not properly shown to be in the presence of the concerned person, and the section 138C certificate was missing. With the contemporaneous import data wrongly discarded and no reliable proof of extra consideration or misdeclaration, rejection of transaction value, re-determination of duty, confiscation-related findings, and penalties could not stand.
Statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act could not be relied on to support undervaluation unless the procedure in section 138B was followed, including examination of the maker, a finding that admission was in the interests of justice, and an opportunity for cross-examination; absent that compliance, the statements were inadmissible. Electronic material retrieved from a laptop was also rejected because the seizure and handling were doubtful, retrieval was not properly shown to be in the presence of the concerned person, and the section 138C certificate was missing. With the contemporaneous import data wrongly discarded and no reliable proof of extra consideration or misdeclaration, rejection of transaction value, re-determination of duty, confiscation-related findings, and penalties could not stand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
