https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447393 A non-scheduled (passenger) operator was held capable of complying with the customs exemption condition by using imported aircraft for charter operations, because the aircraft rules broadly treated air transport service as carriage by air for remuneration and the notification did not bar charter use. Carriage of group-company personnel, absence of ticket issuance, or one non-remunerative familiarisation flight did not by itself establish breach; the alleged misuse-based confiscation, duty demand and penalty therefore could not stand. On refund of redemption fine, interest was denied because no statutory provision authorised it, while the bank guarantees furnished for the underlying adjudication order were directed to be discharged. en-us Mon, 03 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Dec 2023 09:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447393 A non-scheduled (passenger) operator was held capable of complying with the customs exemption condition by using imported aircraft for charter operations, because the aircraft rules broadly treated air transport service as carriage by air for remuneration and the notification did not bar charter use. Carriage of group-company personnel, absence of ticket issuance, or one non-remunerative familiarisation flight did not by itself establish breach; the alleged misuse-based confiscation, duty demand and penalty therefore could not stand. On refund of redemption fine, interest was denied because no statutory provision authorised it, while the bank guarantees furnished for the underlying adjudication order were directed to be discharged. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 03 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447393