https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772162 CESTAT New Delhi held that customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to invoke section 28AAA of Customs Act without DGFT cancelling or initiating cancellation proceedings for FMS scrips. The court relied on Delhi HC precedent in Amit Exports case, which established that customs cannot doubt instrument validity without DGFT adjudication. Statement under section 108 was inadmissible due to non-compliance with section 138B procedural safeguards. FOB exporter not liable for post-export diversion but must prove goods reached focus market. Penalties on appellant and director unsustainable due to lack of evidence and procedural defects. Confiscation order ineffective as goods already exported. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jun 2025 08:25:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772162 CESTAT New Delhi held that customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to invoke section 28AAA of Customs Act without DGFT cancelling or initiating cancellation proceedings for FMS scrips. The court relied on Delhi HC precedent in Amit Exports case, which established that customs cannot doubt instrument validity without DGFT adjudication. Statement under section 108 was inadmissible due to non-compliance with section 138B procedural safeguards. FOB exporter not liable for post-export diversion but must prove goods reached focus market. Penalties on appellant and director unsustainable due to lack of evidence and procedural defects. Confiscation order ineffective as goods already exported. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772162