https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773169 The Tribunal set aside customs duty demands and penalties imposed on a courier firm, finding the adjudicating authorities failed to distinguish between the appellant's role as clearing agent versus owner/importer of parcels. The authorities did not adequately examine evidence including delivery receipts to consignees, failed to identify prohibited goods under Section 111(d) of Customs Act 1962, and did not explain valuation methodology for duty assessment. The adjudication violated natural justice principles by mechanically imposing penalties without proper hearing or reasoned findings. The matter was remanded for de novo adjudication with directions for fair hearing and consideration of all evidence within six months. en-us Thu, 05 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jun 2025 08:29:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773169 The Tribunal set aside customs duty demands and penalties imposed on a courier firm, finding the adjudicating authorities failed to distinguish between the appellant's role as clearing agent versus owner/importer of parcels. The authorities did not adequately examine evidence including delivery receipts to consignees, failed to identify prohibited goods under Section 111(d) of Customs Act 1962, and did not explain valuation methodology for duty assessment. The adjudication violated natural justice principles by mechanically imposing penalties without proper hearing or reasoned findings. The matter was remanded for de novo adjudication with directions for fair hearing and consideration of all evidence within six months. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 05 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773169