https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775655 The CESTAT Kolkata held that the penalty and confiscation orders were unsustainable as the SCN did not properly invoke Section 28(4) for extended period demands relating to transactions from 2010-2011, making penalty imposition invalid. No grounds were made out under Sections 132 and 135 for improper export, and penalty under Section 114A was improperly imposed without notice. Confiscation was also set aside since no specific clause under Section 113 was cited and the goods had already been exported and were unavailable for confiscation. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the appeal allowed. en-us Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 14:54:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775655 The CESTAT Kolkata held that the penalty and confiscation orders were unsustainable as the SCN did not properly invoke Section 28(4) for extended period demands relating to transactions from 2010-2011, making penalty imposition invalid. No grounds were made out under Sections 132 and 135 for improper export, and penalty under Section 114A was improperly imposed without notice. Confiscation was also set aside since no specific clause under Section 113 was cited and the goods had already been exported and were unavailable for confiscation. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775655