https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771352 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal against customs duty demand and penalty under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962. The appellants imported capital goods under EPCG license but allegedly failed to fulfill export obligations. Though DGFT initially issued incorrect fulfillment certificate later admitting error, DGFT subsequently regularized the export obligation through compensation fee payment and confirmed fulfillment via certificate dated 31.01.2012. The tribunal held DGFT is competent authority to determine export obligation fulfillment under policy. Since DGFT had regularized and accepted fulfillment, customs duty demand on non-fulfillment grounds was legally unsustainable. Penalties against company and managing director were set aside. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 May 2025 09:00:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771352 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal against customs duty demand and penalty under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962. The appellants imported capital goods under EPCG license but allegedly failed to fulfill export obligations. Though DGFT initially issued incorrect fulfillment certificate later admitting error, DGFT subsequently regularized the export obligation through compensation fee payment and confirmed fulfillment via certificate dated 31.01.2012. The tribunal held DGFT is competent authority to determine export obligation fulfillment under policy. Since DGFT had regularized and accepted fulfillment, customs duty demand on non-fulfillment grounds was legally unsustainable. Penalties against company and managing director were set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771352