https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430591 The Court held that the Customs Department lacked jurisdiction over SEZ units post the SEZ Act, emphasizing the authority of the Development Commissioner. Importing finished jewellery for remaking was deemed legal under the SEZ Rules. The invocation of Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act was found unjustified due to lack of prohibition and mis-declaration. Duty demand under Section 28 was deemed unwarranted as SEZ exemptions applied. The imposition of a penalty under Section 114A was beyond the scope of the notice. The Court quashed show cause notices, discharged petitioners, and directed the return of bank guarantees. en-us Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Nov 2022 15:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430591 The Court held that the Customs Department lacked jurisdiction over SEZ units post the SEZ Act, emphasizing the authority of the Development Commissioner. Importing finished jewellery for remaking was deemed legal under the SEZ Rules. The invocation of Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act was found unjustified due to lack of prohibition and mis-declaration. Duty demand under Section 28 was deemed unwarranted as SEZ exemptions applied. The imposition of a penalty under Section 114A was beyond the scope of the notice. The Court quashed show cause notices, discharged petitioners, and directed the return of bank guarantees. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430591