<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>DRI officers held proper under s.28, but bona fide buyers escape customs duty, confiscation and penalties under s.125</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94483</link>
    <description>CESTAT held that officers of DRI, including the Additional Director, are &quot;proper officers&quot; under s.28 of the Customs Act and thus competent to issue SCN, in line with the binding LB decision of the SC. However, on merits, CESTAT found that Appellant No. 1 had purchased the Mercedes car bona fide and Appellant No. 2 had only facilitated the purchase, without any collusion in mis-declaration, undervaluation, or violation of customs provisions. As they were not the importers and did not seek redemption under s.125, no duty demand or penal consequence could be fastened upon them. Consequently, the confiscation and penalties were set aside and the appeals were allowed in full.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:41 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867024" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>DRI officers held proper under s.28, but bona fide buyers escape customs duty, confiscation and penalties under s.125</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94483</link>
      <description>CESTAT held that officers of DRI, including the Additional Director, are &quot;proper officers&quot; under s.28 of the Customs Act and thus competent to issue SCN, in line with the binding LB decision of the SC. However, on merits, CESTAT found that Appellant No. 1 had purchased the Mercedes car bona fide and Appellant No. 2 had only facilitated the purchase, without any collusion in mis-declaration, undervaluation, or violation of customs provisions. As they were not the importers and did not seek redemption under s.125, no duty demand or penal consequence could be fastened upon them. Consequently, the confiscation and penalties were set aside and the appeals were allowed in full.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:41 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>