https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768661 Re-import of expired medicines at a non-notified port was treated as customs import where the surrounding facts, correspondence and conduct showed the appellant's knowledge of the movement of the same goods earlier exported. On that basis, the appellant was held liable as importer to file the bill of entry, and the duty equivalent to the export incentive foregone, together with DEPB recovery, was upheld. The goods were also held liable to confiscation. On penalties, the simultaneous levy under Section 114A of the Customs Act was not sustained once penalty under Section 112(a) was imposed on the same facts, and the penalty under Section 112(a) was retained with reduction in quantum. en-us Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Apr 2025 19:43:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768661 Re-import of expired medicines at a non-notified port was treated as customs import where the surrounding facts, correspondence and conduct showed the appellant's knowledge of the movement of the same goods earlier exported. On that basis, the appellant was held liable as importer to file the bill of entry, and the duty equivalent to the export incentive foregone, together with DEPB recovery, was upheld. The goods were also held liable to confiscation. On penalties, the simultaneous levy under Section 114A of the Customs Act was not sustained once penalty under Section 112(a) was imposed on the same facts, and the penalty under Section 112(a) was retained with reduction in quantum. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768661