Customs & Cess

Appellant is entitled to interest from the date of deposit to the date of refund

The CESTAT, New Delhi in the matter of M/s BBM Impex Pvt. Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) [Customs Early Hearing Application No.50414 of 2022 with Customs Appeal No. 51662 of

Waiver of pre-deposit is not tenable on account of financial inability

The CESTAT, New Delhi in the matter of M/s Prem Kumar Ojha v. Commissioner of Customs-Jaipur I [Customs Miscellaneous Application No. 50245 of 2022 dated July 04, 2022] held that, in view

Excise duty cannot be demanded for clandestine removal based on third party evidence

The CESTAT, New Delhi in the matter of M/s Shri Shyam Ingot & Castings Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise [Excise Appeal No. 52550 of 2019-SM dated August 08, 2022] held

Arbitrary valuation of goods not subjected to BIS specifications is invalid

The CESTAT, Chennai in the matter of M/s. SK Enterprises v The Commissioner of Customs [CUSTOMS APPEAL No. 40017 of 2022 dated June 24, 2022] set aside and held that the revaluation of the goods

EOU not entitled to claim refund of TED on its own, may avail of the entitlements of DTA supplier specified in FTP

The Supreme Court of India in the matter of Sandoz Private Limited v. Union of India [Civil Appeal No. 3358 of 2020 dated January 4, 2020] upheld the decision of the Bombay High Court that Export

Adoption of ICT and integration of LIMBS with CESTAT, ITAT and other Tribunals to reduce delay in litigation management

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in C.C.E. AND S.T., Surat I v. Bilfinder Neo Structo Construction Ltd. Civil Appeal No(s).674/2021 dated November 29, 2021] issued directives for the adoption

Where two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible then the construction which favours the assessee must be adopted

The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (“CESTAT”) in the matter of John’s Cashew Company v. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin [Final Order 20792 /2021 dated October

Registration is not a requirement for filling refund claim

The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (“CESTAT”) in the matter of M/s Blue River Capital India Advisory Services LLP v. Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai

Penalty demand and proposal of confiscation cannot be separated from Customs duty demand

The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (“CESTAT”) in the matter of M/s. Dhiren Enterprise v. Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), Mumbai [Final Order

No violation of procedure under Foreign Trade Policy if goods imported for personal use against Bill of Entry without having IEC

The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (“CESTAT”) in the matter of Mr. Subodh Menon v. Commissioner of Customs, ACC Mumbai [Final Order No. A/87045/2021 dated November

Limitation period for granting refund not applicable to refund of Custom duty paid in excess

The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (“CESTAT”) in the matter of M/s FCI OEN Connectors v. Commissioner Of Central Tax & Central Excise, Cochin [Final Order No.2079

Taking credit and then reversing the same entry is as good as not taking the credit at all

In M/s Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories v. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax [Order No. 70247-70248/2021 dated November 5, 2021] Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax

Articles

Appellant is entitled to interest from the date of deposit to the date of refund

Waiver of pre-deposit is not tenable on account of financial inability

Excise duty cannot be demanded for clandestine removal based on third party evidence

Arbitrary valuation of goods not subjected to BIS specifications is invalid

EOU not entitled to claim refund of TED on its own, may avail of the entitlements of DTA supplier specified in FTP

Adoption of ICT and integration of LIMBS with CESTAT, ITAT and other Tribunals to reduce delay in litigation management

Where two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible then the construction which favours the assessee must be adopted

Registration is not a requirement for filling refund claim

Penalty demand and proposal of confiscation cannot be separated from Customs duty demand

No violation of procedure under Foreign Trade Policy if goods imported for personal use against Bill of Entry without having IEC

Limitation period for granting refund not applicable to refund of Custom duty paid in excess

Taking credit and then reversing the same entry is as good as not taking the credit at all

Latest on Posts