| Sr. No. | Year | Case | Court | Remarks | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2019 | CB PARTHIV DAVE VS AHMEDABAD CESTAT | CESTAT, Ahmedabad | CB PENALISED U/SEC 114 FOR ABETTING LOSS OF REVENUE | CASE LAWS -- CB PENALISED U/SEC 114 FOR ABETTING LOSS OF REVENUE -- CB PARTHIV DAVE -- AHMEDABAD CESTAT |
| 2 | 2012 | M/S. CHAKIAT AGENCIES & M/S.SOJI KURIAKOSE VS COMM. OF CUSTOMS (EXPORTS), CHENNAI | CESTAT, CHENNAI | CB CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO EXAMINE AND ENSURE NATURE OF GOODS IN CONSIGNMENT | CASE LAWS -- CB CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO EXAMINE AND ENSURE NATURE OF GOODS IN CONSIGNMENT -- CHENNAI CESTAT SETS ASIDE PENALTY U/SEC 114 |
| 3 | 2023 | M/S HOLY LAND MARKETING Pvt. Ltd. VS COMM. OF CUSTOMS,NEW DELHI | CESTAT, NEW DELHI |
ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE ISSUED ONCE GOODS CLEARED ON PAYMNT OF DUTY | CASE LAWS -- ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE ISSUED ONCE GOODS CLEARED ON PAYMNT OF DUTY -- NEW DELHI CESTAT UPHELDS COMM. APPEALS ORDER REJECTING RE-ASSESSMENT -- HOLY LAND MARKETING |
| 4 | 2020 | CESTAT BANGALORE VS ADANI WILMAR |
CESTAT, BANGALORE | NOTIFICATION EFFECTIVE DATE -- ONLY AFTER DIGITALLY SIGNED AND UPLOADED AND GAZETTED -- NOT THE DATE OF ISSUE | CASE LAWS -- NOTIFICATION EFFECTIVE DATE -- ONLY AFTER DIGITALLY SIGNED AND UPLOADED AND GAZETTED -- NOT THE DATE OF ISSUE -- CESTAT BANGALORE --- ADANI WILMAR |
| 5 | 2010 | M/S GODREJ SARA LEE LTD. VS THE EXCISE AND TAXATION OFFICER- CUM-ASSESSING AUTHORITY & ORS. |
THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION |
Tax Authorities Should Maintain Discipline To Follow Decisions Of Higher Authorities | CASE LAWS -- Tax Authorities Should Maintain Discipline To Follow Decisions Of Higher Authorities : Supreme Court |
| 6 | 2023 | TECHNOCRAFT INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. VS THE UNION OF INDIA, THE DGFT, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY, DEPT. OF COMMERCE, THE ADD. DGFT, THE COMM. OF CUSTOMS NSII, RAIGAD | BOMBAY HIGH COURT |
DGFT REJECTS MEIS CLAIM AGAINST AMENDMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED MANUALLY BY CUSTOMS AS S/BILLS NOT UPLOADED ON SYSTEM | CASE LAWS -- DGFT REJECTS MEIS CLAIM AGAINST AMENDMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED MANUALLY BY CUSTOMS AS S/BILLS NOT UPLOADED ON SYSTEM - MUMBAI HIGH COURT DIRECTS CUSTOMS & DGFT TO SUBMIT AFFIDAVIT FOR STEP TAKEN |
| 7 | 2023 | DELHI HIGH COURT VS GREEN VIEW LOGISTICS |
DELHI HIGH COURT |
WRONG HS CODE BY SHIPPER -- DEPT ALLOWS SHIPMENT WITH DUE AMENDMENT -- CB LIC RESTORED AS ERROR TO ADVISE SHIPPER NOT MISCONDUCT UNDER CBLR | CASE LAWS -- WRONG HS CODE BY SHIPPER -- DEPT ALLOWS SHIPMENT WITH DUE AMENDMENT -- CB LIC RESTORED AS ERROR TO ADVISE SHIPPER NOT MISCONDUCT UNDER CBLR -- DELHI HIGH COURT -- GREEN VIEW LOGISTICS |
| 8 | 2021 | M/S. HERA SHIPPING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI | CESTAT, CHENNAI | NO PROOF OF ABETMENT BY CB - CESTAT SETS ASIDE PENAL ACTION U/SEC 114 | CASE LAWS -- NO PROOF OF ABETMENT BY CB - CESTAT SETS ASIDE PENAL ACTION U/SEC 114 -- HERA SHIPPING SOLUTIONS P LTD |
| 9 | 2023 | THE COMM. OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KERALA., THE DEVELOPMENT COMM. COCHIN SEZ VS ASHWIN GOLD PVT. LTD, K.O. ANTO, PROPRIETOR, M/S. KALLARACKAL JEWELLERS, M/S. JOYALUKKAS INDIA PVT. LTD, | KERALA HIGH COURT |
GOODS LYING IN UNCLEARAED AREA CANNOT BE CONFISCATED BY CUSTOMS | CASE LAWS -- GOODS LYING IN UNCLEARAED AREA CANNOT BE CONFISCATED BY CUSTOMS-- KERALA HIGH COURT SETS ASIDE PENAL ACTION |
| 10 | 2013 | SANOFI INDIA LIMITED VS C.C.E. & S.T.- SURAT-II, SURAT | CESTAT, Ahmadabad | MALAFIDE INTENTION OF EMPLOYEES CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO EMPLOYER | CASE LAWS -MALAFIDE INTENTION OF EMPLOYEES CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO EMPLOYER - AHMEDABAD CESTAT DELETES PERSONAL PENALTY |
| 11 | 2023 | M/S. IB TRACK SOLUTIONS PVT LTD., VS STATE OF KARNATAKA MR. SUNIL S. PATIL SR. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, DRI |
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT |
TEMPERED RFID E-SEALS AMOUNTS TO COMPROMISING SECURITY -- KARNATAKA HIGH COURT APPROVES CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MANAGING DIRECTOR | CASE LAWS -- TEMPERED RFID E-SEALS AMOUNTS TO COMPROMISING SECURITY -- KARNATAKA HIGH COURT APPROVES CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MANAGING DIRECTOR -- IB TRACK SOLUTIONS P LTD |
| 12 | 2023 | CHENNAI CESTAT VS ARS STEELS& ALLOY |
CESTAT, CHENNAI | GOODS EXAMINED 100% AND FOUND AS DECLARED -- PSI CERT ISSUED BY BRANCH CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS IMPROPER IMPORT U/SEC 111(d) - PENALTY U/SEC 112(a) SET ASIDE | CASE LAWS -- GOODS EXAMINED 100% AND FOUND AS DECLARED -- PSI CERT ISSUED BY BRANCH CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS IMPROPER IMPORT U/SEC 111(d) - PENALTY U/SEC 112(a) SET ASIDE -- CHENNAI CESTAT - ARS STEELS& ALLOY |
| 13 | 2023 | HEWLETT PACKARD V/S COMM NHAVA SHEVA |
SUPREME COURT |
PORTABLE COMPUTERS CANNOT BE CLASSIFIED UNDER 8471 30 10 ON CRITERIA OF WEIGHT, LESS THAN 10 KGS -- SUPREME COURT ACCEPTS CTH 8471 50 00 AS DECLARED | CASE LAWS -- PORTABLE COMPUTERS CANNOT BE CLASSIFIED UNDER 8471 30 10 ON CRITERIA OF WEIGHT, LESS THAN 10 KGS -- SUPREME COURT ACCEPTS CTH 8471 50 00 AS DECLARED -- HEWLETT PACKARD V/S COMM NHAVA SHEVA |
| 14 | 2023 | CESTAT CHENNAI SETS ASIDE REJECTION VS KOMATSU INDIA P LTD |
CESTAT, CHENNAI | CASH SECURITY DEPOSIT IS NOT CUSTOMS DUTY -- TIME LIMITATION U/SEC 27(1) FOR REFUND NOT APPLICABLE | CASE LAWS -- CASH SECURITY DEPOSIT IS NOT CUSTOMS DUTY -- TIME LIMITATION U/SEC 27(1) FOR REFUND NOT APPLICABLE -- CESTAT CHENNAI SETS ASIDE REJECTION -- KOMATSU INDIA P LTD |
| 15 | 2023 | CESTAT NEW DELHI VS SHRI BALAJI CERAMIC PRODUCTS |
CESTAT, NEW DELHI | REIMPORT OF EXPORTED GOODS -- CHANGE IN POLICY FROM FREE TO RESTRICTED DOES NOT APPLY TO GOODS EXPORTED BEFORE THE DATE OF RESTRICTION | CASE LAWS -- REIMPORT OF EXPORTED GOODS -- CHANGE IN POLICY FROM FREE TO RESTRICTED DOES NOT APPLY TO GOODS EXPORTED BEFORE THE DATE OF RESTRICTION -- CESTAT NEW DELHI - SHRI BALAJI CERAMIC PRODUCTS |
| 16 | 2023 | CESTAT NEW DELHI VS CIPRA ENTERPRISES |
CESTAT, NEW DELHI | WRONGLY CLAIMED BENEFIT UNDER MEIS -- BEING UNAWARE OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN -- FINE/PENALTY REDUCED AS GOODS NOT PROHIBITED | CASE LAWS -- WRONGLY CLAIMED BENEFIT UNDER MEIS -- BEING UNAWARE OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN -- FINE-PENALTY REDUCED AS GOODS NOT PROHIBITED- CESTAT NEW DELHI -- CIPRA ENTERPRISES |
| 17 | 2020 | NEW DELHI CESTAT SETS ASIDE ORDER VS DM MARKETING |
CESTAT, NEW DELHI | REJECTION OF DECLARED VALUE WITHOUT REASONS U/RULE 12 OF CVR AND RE-DETERMINATION U/RULE 5 NOT ACCEPTABLE | CASE LAWS -- REJECTION OF DECLARED VALUE WITHOUT REASONS U-RULE 12 OF CVR AND RE-DETERMINATION U-RULE 5 NOT ACCEPTABLE -- NEW DELHI CESTAT SETS ASIDE ORDER -- DM MARKETING |
| 18 | 2022 | MUMBAU CESTAT SETS ASIDE PENALTY LEVIED U/SEC 111(m) VS OBEROI CONSTRUCTIONS |
CESTAT, MUMBAI | CHANGED CTH ACCEPTED BY IMPORTER CANNOT BE MIS-DECLARATION | CASE LAWS -- CHANGED CTH ACCEPTED BY IMPORTER CANNOT BE MIS-DECLARATION - MUMBAU CESTAT SETS ASIDE PENALTY LEVIED U/SEC 111(m)-- OBEROI CONSTRUCTIONS |
| 19 | 2023 | ELAN ELECTRONICS INDIA VS COMM. OF CUSTOMS (APPEAL), NEW DELHI | CESTAT, NEW DELHI | DUTY PAID GOODS STORED U/SEC 49 FOR COMPLIANCE-- RE-EXPORT ALLOWED -- PERIOD OF LIMITATION SEC 27(1) NOT APPLICABLE-- DUTY REFUND ALLOWED | CASE LAWS -- DUTY PAID GOODS STORED U-SEC 49 FOR COMPLIANCE-- RE-EXPORT ALLOWED -- PERIOD OF LIMITATION SEC 27(1) NOT APPLICABLE-- DUTY REFUND ALLOWED-- CESTAT NEW DELHI-- ELAN ELECTRONICS INDIA |
| 20 | 2023 | PERFECT IMPORTERS AND DISTRIBUTORS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VS UNION OF INDIA | GUJARAT HIGH COURT | B/E FILED BETWEEN DATES OF PROVISIONAL AND FINAL NOTF --ADD NOT APPLICABLE | CASE LAWS -- B/E FILED BETWEEN DATES OF PROVISIONAL AND FINAL NOTF --ADD NOT APPLICABLE -- GUJARAT HIGH COURT ALLOWS REFUND WITH INTEREST |
| 21 | 2023 | HIGHLIGHTS / CATCH NOTES | UPDATES | PERSON WORKING IN THE CAPACITY OF CONSULTANT CANNOT BE DEEMED WORKMAN plus more... | Updates - PERSON WORKING IN THE CAPACITY OF CONSULTANT CANNOT BE DEEMED WORKMAN"" plus more... |
| 22 | 2022 | M/S. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LTD. VS COMM. OF CUSTOMS-NHAVA SHEVA-III | CESTAT, MUMBAI | IF NO DATE IS AVAILABLE ON THE O-IN-O DATE OF RECEIPT TO BE CONSIDERED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY | CASE LAWS -- IF NO DATE IS AVAILABLE ON THE O-IN-O DATE OF RECEIPT TO BE CONSIDERED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY -- CESTAT MUMBAI -- SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LTD |
| 23 | 2022 | M/S. K.Y. CONTINENTAL INTERIORS PVT. LTD. VS COMM. OF CUSTOMS, JAIPUR | CESTAT, NEW DELHI | NEW DELHI CESTAT ORDERS CUSTOMS TO DESEAL MACHINERY FOR INSTALLATION AND MANUFACTURE ACTIVITIES -- DGFT EXTENDS TIME TO FULFILL EPCG EXPORT OBLIGATIONS | CASE LAWS -- DGFT EXTENDS TIME TO FULFILL EPCG EXPORT OBLIGATIONS -- NEW DELHI CESTAT ORDERS CUSTOMS TO DESEAL MACHINERY FOR INSTALLATION AND MANUFACTURE ACTIVITIES -- K Y CONTINENTAL INTERIORS P LTD |
| 24 | 2022 | VALBAUX MINETECH VS GUJARAT HIGH COURT |
GUJARAT HIGH COURT |
GOODS DETAINED FOR OVER TWO YEARS AND PENDING INVESTIGATION FOR SUSPECTING COO -- HIGH COURT RELEASES GOODS PROVISIONALLY | CASE LAWS -- GOODS DETAINED FOR OVER TWO YEARS AND PENDING INVESTIGATION FOR SUSPECTING COO -- HIGH COURT RELEASES GOODS PROVISIONALLY --VALBAUX MINETECH -- GUJARAT HIGH COURT |
| 25 | 2023 | C.C. - KANDLA VS GOODEARTH MARITIME LTD | CESTAT, AHMEDABAD | IF STAY ORDER NOT GRANTED WITHIN 3 MONTHS REFUND MUST BE GIVEN | CASE LAWS -- IF STAY ORDER NOT GRANTED WITHIN 3 MONTHS REFUND MUST BE GIVEN -- GOODEARTH MARITIME LTD --CESTAT AHMEDABAD |
| 26 | 2023 | RAGHAV INTERNATIONAL THROUGH PROPRIETOR VISHAL BHARATBHUSHAN JAIN & OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. | GUJARAT HIGH COURT | SCN ISSUED AFTER 5-10 YEARS FOR RECOVERY OF EXCESS DRAWBACK - | CASE LAWS -- SCN ISSUED AFTER 5-10 YEARS FOR RECOVERY OF EXCESS DRAWBACK -- GUJARAT HIGH COURT QUASHES ORDER -- RAGHAV INTERNATIONAL |
| 27 | 2023 | COMM. OF CUSTOMS, LUDHIANA VERSUS M/S OSWAL WOOLEN MILLS LTD AND MONTE CARLO FASHION LTD |
CESTAT CHANDIGARH | IF APPEAL NOT ADMITTED CUSTOMS MUST REFUND DUTY WITH INTEREST IF DELAYED BEYOUND 3 MONTHS | CASE LAWS -- IF APPEAL NOT ADMITTED CUSTOMS MUST REFUND DUTY WITH INTEREST IF DELAYED BEYOUND 3 MONTHS |
| 28 | 2023 | M/S. DCM HYUNDAI LTD. VERSUS COMM. OF GST & CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI | CESTAT CHENNAI | SCN ISSUED U/SEC 28 FOR INTEREST ON BONDED GOODS BEYOND BONDING PERIOD | CASE LAWS -- SCN ISSUED U/SEC 28 FOR INTEREST ON BONDED GOODS BEYOND BONDING PERIOD -- CESTAT CHENNAI RULES SCN VOID -- DCM HYUNDAI LTD |
| 29 | 2023 | MANOJ KUMAR DHARIWAL VS THE ASST. COMM. OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI | THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS | HIGH COURT REJECTS APPEAL FILED AFTER GAP OF 16 YEARS.DIRECTS IMPORTER TO PAY DIFFERNTIAL DUTY | CASE LAWS -- HIGH COURT REJECTS APPEAL FILED AFTER GAP OF 16 YEARS -- DIRECTS IMPORTER TO PAY DIFFERNTIAL DUTY -- HIGH COURT MADRAS -- MANOJ KUMAR DHARIWAL |
| 30 | 2023 | COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE) VERSUS MUSTAN TAHERBHAI | SUPREME COURT | LIABILITY OFCUSTOMS DUTY ON IMPORTER; VESSEL OWNER IS IMPORTER AND NOT VESSEL | CASE LAWS -- LIABILITY OFCUSTOMS DUTY ON IMPORTER -- VESSEL OWNER IS IMPORTER AND NOT VESSEL -- SUPREME COURT V/S COMM OF CUSTOMS --MUSTAN TAHERBHAI |
