https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774158 The CESTAT Mumbai set aside an order involving absolute confiscation of imported intra ocular lenses. The appellant had applied for licence renewal and imports occurred during the interim period before receiving the renewed licence. The court found that since a valid licence existed at adjudication time, seizure should have been vacated. The authority incorrectly applied valuation rules for post parcels by comparing with Air Cargo Complex imports, which have different assessment processes. The court held that enforcement jurisdiction for drug-related breaches is restricted to import locations, and subsequent violations fall under municipal jurisdiction. Both grounds for confiscation - lack of licence and improper valuation comparison - were found legally invalid, resulting in appeal allowance and revenue dismissal. en-us Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774158 The CESTAT Mumbai set aside an order involving absolute confiscation of imported intra ocular lenses. The appellant had applied for licence renewal and imports occurred during the interim period before receiving the renewed licence. The court found that since a valid licence existed at adjudication time, seizure should have been vacated. The authority incorrectly applied valuation rules for post parcels by comparing with Air Cargo Complex imports, which have different assessment processes. The court held that enforcement jurisdiction for drug-related breaches is restricted to import locations, and subsequent violations fall under municipal jurisdiction. Both grounds for confiscation - lack of licence and improper valuation comparison - were found legally invalid, resulting in appeal allowance and revenue dismissal. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774158