https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192779 The court upheld the adjudicating authority's decision to vacate the seizure of imported spares, ruling that there was no violation of the Customs Act 1962 or intent to evade duty. The respondent's explanation that the spares were for future usage and not meant to evade duty was accepted, leading to no penalties imposed. The court found no infirmity in the decision and rejected the Revenue's appeal, affirming the legality of the adjudicating authority's ruling. en-us Tue, 07 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Jun 2017 08:35:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192779 The court upheld the adjudicating authority's decision to vacate the seizure of imported spares, ruling that there was no violation of the Customs Act 1962 or intent to evade duty. The respondent's explanation that the spares were for future usage and not meant to evade duty was accepted, leading to no penalties imposed. The court found no infirmity in the decision and rejected the Revenue's appeal, affirming the legality of the adjudicating authority's ruling. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 07 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192779