ALO Partners Logo

𝐀𝐚𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐚𝐚 𝐋𝐚𝐰 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 (𝐀𝐋𝐎)

Category: CBIC CUSTOMS

  • CESTAT Mumbai- Customs Department directed to pay interest on pre-deposit as per Section 129EE

    CESTAT Mumbai- Customs Department directed to pay interest on pre-deposit as per Section 129EE

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 08.05.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai- Customs Department directed to pay interest on pre-deposit as per Section 129EE

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench ruled in favor of Appellant, directing the Customs Department to pay interest on the delayed refund of pre-deposit. The case pertains to a refund claim made nearly 13 years after a partial success in appeal, where the interest component was denied by the lower authorities.

    Case Background:

    • Appellant: Appellant, Mumbai
    • Original Penalty: ₹5,00,000 for alleged involvement in misuse of a duty-free license
    • Pre-Deposit Made: ₹2,50,000 under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962
    • Appeal Outcome (2006): Penalty reduced to ₹1,00,000
    • Refund Claim Filed: December 2006 for balance ₹1,50,000
    • Refund Sanctioned: March 2019 — without interest
    • Appeal Filed for Interest: Rejected in 2021 by Commissioner (Appeals)

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Mumbai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT New Delhi- Customs restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and no misrepresentation or suppression was proven

    CESTAT New Delhi- Customs restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and no misrepresentation or suppression was proven

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 06.05.2025

    CESTAT New Delhi- Customs restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and no misrepresentation or suppression was proven

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, by order dated May 2, 2025, set aside the confiscation, duty demand, and penalties imposed via Order-in-Original dated 19.05.2010. The case centered on the import of a Bell 407 helicopter under exemption Notification No. 21/2002-Cus as amended by Notification No. 61/2007-Cus and the alleged misuse of the duty exemption granted under Condition No. 104.

    Background of the Case:

    • Importer: M/s. Sky Airways (a Division of G.S.I. Pvt. Ltd.)
    • Aircraft Imported: Bell 407 Helicopter
    • Date of Import: January 2008
    • Declared Use: Non-Scheduled (Passenger) Services
    • Exemption Claimed: Notification No. 21/2002-Cus (S.No. 347B) subject to Condition No. 104

    The helicopter was imported for non-scheduled passenger services, and a statutory undertaking was provided that it would be used accordingly. However, the department alleged the aircraft was operated as a charter service, not a passenger service, by a third-party entity, violating the notification terms.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT New Delhi

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Duty Demand on Ingram Micro India Over Inordinate Adjudication Delay

    CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Duty Demand on Ingram Micro India Over Inordinate Adjudication Delay

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 06.05.2025

    CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Duty Demand on Ingram Micro India Over Inordinate Adjudication Delay

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench allowed the appeal filed by M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd., setting aside the differential customs duty demand imposed by the Adjudicating Authority after a 13-year delay in adjudication. The Tribunal invoked the principle of reasonable timeliness in quasi-judicial proceedings, reinforcing that prolonged administrative inaction cannot be used to penalize assessees.

    Case Overview:

    • Importer: M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai
    • Dispute: Classification of “Loose Tube Optical Fibre Cables”
    • Original Classification: Claimed under a concessional entry attracting Notification No. 24/2005-Cus.
    • Departmental Re-classification: Re-classified under CTH 9001, denying exemption
    • Show Cause Notice (SCN): Issued in 2007
    • Order-in-Original: Passed only in October 2020
    • First Appellate Order: Upheld the demand (March 2021)

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Chennai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Allahabad set aside the confiscation of gold, silver, and cash

    CESTAT Allahabad set aside the confiscation of gold, silver, and cash

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 06.05.2025

    CESTAT Allahabad set aside the confiscation of gold, silver, and cash

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad Bench has allowed appeals filed by Appellants, overturning the Order-in-Original dated April 11, 2022. The case revolved around the alleged smuggling of 3499.750 grams of gold, silver recovery, and Rs. 16.5 lakhs in cash, with charges leveled under multiple sections of the Customs Act, 1962, including Sections 111, 112, 121, and 123.

    Case Background

    • The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Lucknow Zonal Unit, seized the gold on February 13, 2021 based on intelligence inputs.
    • Subsequent search of the Mitruka brothers’ premises led to seizure of 7770.410 gm of silver and Rs. 16.5 lakh in cash.
    • Show Cause Notices were issued alleging a conspiracy to smuggle gold into India via Myanmar through Guwahati and Bihar.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Allahabad

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Kolkata ruled that confiscation and penalty were unjustified when ownership was already relinquished and misdeclaration wasn’t proven

    CESTAT Kolkata ruled that confiscation and penalty were unjustified when ownership was already relinquished and misdeclaration wasn’t proven

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 06.05.2025

    CESTAT Kolkata ruled that confiscation and penalty were unjustified when ownership was already relinquished and misdeclaration wasn’t proven

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench delivered a significant ruling in favour of multiple importers, including Appellants, Kritika Impex, Kushagra Shipping Agency, Ganpati Roadways, and Bhawani Cargo Movers, who were accused of misdeclaration of goods and liable for penalties and duty demand.

    Case Background

    • Date of Bill of Entry: 11 September 2021 (No. 5405619) and earlier on 31 August 2021 (No. 5257900)
    • The importers had filed Bills of Entry based on shipping documents received from the foreign seller.
    • Upon learning on 18 September 2021 that the container had been wrongly loaded, the importers promptly notified Customs and declared relinquishment of goods under Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962.
    • A 100% examination revealed the presence of white pepper and white wood powder.
    • Despite relinquishing rights and disclosing the issue, the authorities issued Show Cause Notices alleging misdeclaration, invoking penalties and seeking confiscation.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Kolkata

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Kolkata- Higher Customs Duty Held Unenforceable Due to Delay in Notification Publication

    CESTAT Kolkata- Higher Customs Duty Held Unenforceable Due to Delay in Notification Publication

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 05.05.2025

    CESTAT Kolkata- Higher Customs Duty Held Unenforceable Due to Delay in Notification Publication

    The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata, ruled in favour of M/s Emami Agrotech Ltd. by setting aside the demand for differential customs duty on imported crude palm oil. The case involved a dispute over the applicable date for a notification that raised Basic Customs Duty (BCD) from 15% to 30%.

    Case Background:

    • Emami imported crude palm oil in November 2017 via four Bills of Entry dated 16.11.2017.
    • Entry inward for the consignments was granted on 18.11.2017 and 19.11.2017.
    • Notification No. 87/2017-Customs dated 17.11.2017, which increased BCD to 30%, was only published in the Official Gazette on 20.11.2017.
    • Customs demanded higher duty based on the entry inward date.
    • Emami paid the higher duty under protest and later appealed the assessment.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Kolkata

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Bangalore- Customs directed to restore the full sale value of the auctioned goods

    CESTAT Bangalore- Customs directed to restore the full sale value of the auctioned goods

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 05.05.2025

    CESTAT Bangalore- Customs directed to restore the full sale value of the auctioned goods

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench, in its Final Order No. 20530/2025 dated 30 April 2025, has ruled in favour of M/s. Wipro Ltd., allowing restitution of value for imported goods that were auctioned by the Revenue despite the matter being sub judice.

    Case Background:

    • Appellant: M/s. Wipro Ltd., Bangalore
    • Goods: Service application module imported from Cisco Systems, Mexico
    • Declared Value: USD 26,400
    • Revenue’s Enhancement: Value re-determined to USD 1,10,000 based on list price of similar goods
    • Penalty Imposed: Rs. 2,00,000 under Section 112(a) of Customs Act
    • Redemption Fine: Rs. 50,000 under Section 125
    • Goods Status: Auctioned in 2013 while appeal was pending

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Bangalore

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • Delhi High Court Quashes Detention of Gold Kada

    Delhi High Court Quashes Detention of Gold Kada

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 05.05.2025

    Delhi High Court Quashes Detention of Gold Kada

    The Delhi High Court in Daljeet Singh v. Commissioner of Customs [W.P.(C) 5040/2025], quashed the detention of a 22-carat gold kada worn by the petitioner, ruling that it qualifies as a personal effect under the Baggage Rules, 2016, and cannot be confiscated without due process.

    Case Background:

    • Petitioner: Daljeet Singh, a Sikh tourist arriving from Dubai on 29 November 2024.
    • Item Detained: 22-carat gold kada (60 grams) worn by the petitioner.
    • Customs Action: Detained the kada at IGI Airport, New Delhi under Detention Receipt No. DR/INDEL4/29-11-2024/005522.

    Legal Issues Raised:

    1. Whether the gold kada qualifies as a personal effect under Baggage Rules, 2016.
    2. Whether a pre-printed waiver form signed by the petitioner can legally substitute a show cause notice (SCN) and personal hearing under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: Delhi High Court

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT New Delhi- The reassessment was held to be invalid and legally unsustainable

    CESTAT New Delhi- The reassessment was held to be invalid and legally unsustainable

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 03.05.2025

    CESTAT New Delhi- The reassessment was held to be invalid and legally unsustainable

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, ruled in favour of M/s Trina Steelcarb Pvt. Ltd., setting aside a reassessment order that enhanced the assessable value of imported goods without issuing a speaking order as mandated under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962.

    CESTAT’s Key Observations:

    1. Violation of Section 17(5): The Tribunal found that the assessing officer failed to issue a speaking order despite the reassessment being contrary to the importer’s declared self-assessment and without written acceptance. Section 17(5) mandates issuance of a speaking order within 15 days in such cases.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT New Delhi

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT New Delhi- SVB Loading Rejected as Legally Unsustainable

    CESTAT New Delhi- SVB Loading Rejected as Legally Unsustainable

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 02.05.2025

    CESTAT New Delhi- SVB Loading Rejected as Legally Unsustainable

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, allowed the appeal of M/s Rays Engineering Works against the re-assessment of customs duty on imported goods. The Tribunal held that the enhancement of assessable value based on 13% “SVB loading” was illegal and violative of Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962.

    Background:

    • The appellant declared the value of goods at US$ 1.25/kg for slew gear and US$ 0.67/kg for bucket tooth.
    • The Assessing Officer enhanced the declared value by 13% citing SVB loading, without issuing a speaking order under Section 17(5).
    • Appellant paid the enhanced duty but did not provide written acceptance of the reassessment.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT New Delhi

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com