https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772163 CESTAT Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside confiscation of goods and penalties imposed under sections 114AA, 114(iii), and 114AB of the Customs Act. The Tribunal held that customs authorities cannot question DGFT-issued instruments without DGFT initiating cancellation proceedings, following Delhi HC precedent in Amit Exports. The adjudicating authority improperly relied on statements recorded under section 108 without examining witnesses under section 138B procedure. The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of fraud or collusion, noting that title passed to buyer upon Let Export Order issuance and appellant was not responsible for subsequent destination changes. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jun 2025 08:25:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772163 CESTAT Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside confiscation of goods and penalties imposed under sections 114AA, 114(iii), and 114AB of the Customs Act. The Tribunal held that customs authorities cannot question DGFT-issued instruments without DGFT initiating cancellation proceedings, following Delhi HC precedent in Amit Exports. The adjudicating authority improperly relied on statements recorded under section 108 without examining witnesses under section 138B procedure. The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of fraud or collusion, noting that title passed to buyer upon Let Export Order issuance and appellant was not responsible for subsequent destination changes. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772163