ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 03.06.2025
CESTAT Bangalore Quashes Customs Duty Demand on Gardner Aerospace Upon EODC Submission
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench delivered a favorable judgment in Appeal Nos. C/20784 and C/20785 of 2016, filed by M/s. Gardner Aerospace Pranitha Engineering Pvt. Ltd. The appeals challenged the demand of customs duty and penalties imposed due to non-submission of the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) under Notification No. 96/2009-Cus. dated 11.09.2009.
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 03.06.2025
CESTAT Kolkata- Interest Not Payable on Pre-2006 Provisional Assessments
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench has allowed the appeal filed by M/s Century Pulp & Paper, ruling that no interest is payable upon finalization of provisional assessments made before the introduction of Section 18(3) of the Customs Act, 1962.
This decision, issued via Final Order No. 75183/2024 dated 08.02.2024, affirms that interest liability under Section 18(3) is prospective and cannot apply retrospectively to imports assessed provisionally before 13.07.2006, the date on which this provision was inserted via the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2006.
Case Background
Appellant: M/s. Century Pulp & Paper
Issue: Whether interest was payable on customs duty upon final assessment of imports made in 1997-98, assessed provisionally under project import classification (CTH 9801).
Timeline:
Goods imported in 1997β98
Provisional assessments conducted under the old law
Reclassification occurred in 2011β12 due to non-commissioning of the project
Duty of βΉ92.83 lakhs was paid post-finalization in 2014
Interest was demanded by Customs, challenged by the importer
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 02.06.2025
CESTAT Chennai Upholds Transaction Value in Solar Equipment Imports by Enfinity Solar
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has dismissed the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs, upholding the decision in favour of M/s Enfinity Solar Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal found that the Customs Department had no valid legal grounds to load the transaction value of imports made under unrelated-party invoices, despite the alleged related-party concerns.
The final order, pronounced on 29 May 2025, reaffirmed the legal position that valuation under the Customs Act must be based on actual commercial evidence, not assumptions or analogies to income tax transfer pricing methods.
Case Background
Appellant: Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Respondent: M/s Enfinity Solar Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
Imports Involved: Solar panels, photovoltaic (PV) cables, power inverters, and accessories
Foreign Entities: Enfinity N.V., Belgium (Parent Co.) & Enfinity Asia Pacific (Trading) Ltd., Hong Kong
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 02.06.2025
CESTAT Allahabad Allowed to Convert Free Shipping Bills to Drawback Bills Under Section 149
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad Bench, has allowed the appeal of M/s Pakka Ltd. (formerly Yash Pakka Ltd.), setting aside the denial of conversion of free shipping bills to drawback shipping bills. The Tribunal reaffirmed the exporterβs right to seek amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, even post-export, based on pre-existing documentation.
Case Summary
Appellant: M/s Pakka Ltd., Faizabad
Respondent: Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Lucknow
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.
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad, Colourtex Industries Pvt. Ltd. and other appellants have secured a favorable decision in a long-standing customs classification dispute. The case revolved around the import classification of βTWITCHELL 6808 DEDUSTERβ and its eligibility for duty exemption under Indian customs law.
The Dispute: Classification of Imported Deduster
Colourtex Industries, a manufacturer of color dyes, had been importing a product used in the dedusting of dyes during production. The product was declared under Heading 2710 1990, which covers preparations containing 70% or more of petroleum oils. Initially, the product was classified under Heading 3809 9140, but the classification was amended by the appellant in 2017 based on further testing and supplier documentation. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), however, initiated proceedings alleging misclassification. Based on a 2020 test report from the Central Revenues Control Laboratory (CRCL), the DRI claimed the product was a preparation based on organic surface-active agents, meriting classification under Heading 3402 9019. This led to the issuance of a show cause notice and the subsequent adjudication by the Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad, which the appellant challenged before the CESTAT.
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 30.05.2025
CESTAT Kolkata Orders βΉ73 Lakh Drawback Refund to Nidhi Distributors After 22 Years
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench has allowed their appeal in a long-pending dispute dating back to 2002 regarding drawback claims totaling over βΉ73 lakhs. The Tribunal directed the Customs department to process the refund, subject to verification of export realization.
Case Background:
Appellant: M/s Nidhi Distributors
Respondent: Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata
Appeal No.: Customs Appeal No. 75944 of 2021
Date of Final Order: 23 February 2024
Original Issue: Rejection of drawback claim on exports of T-shirts and Gents Shirts under 33 shipping bills from JuneβAugust 2002
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 29.05.2025
CESTAT Chennai Grants SAD Refund to LG Electronics
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has allowed the appeal filed by M/s LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., setting aside the denial of βΉ1,35,179/- of Special Additional Duty (SAD) refund under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. dated 14.09.2007.
Case Background
Appellant: M/s LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., Greater Noida
Commissionerate: Chennai Seaport
Appeal No.: Customs Appeal No. 42340 of 2014
Date of Order: 16 February 2024
Tribunal Members: Mrs. Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Mr. Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical)
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 28.05.2025
CESTAT Delhi- Honest Valuation Error Not Penalized
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi has allowed a group of appeals filed by M/s Delphi Automotive Systems Pvt. Ltd., along with its directors and employees, setting aside a customs duty demand of βΉ25,53,891 and penalties imposed under Sections 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.
The Tribunal held that the valuation errorβtreating Ex-Works prices as FOB for air importsβwas a genuine mistake and not a willful misstatement. Hence, the extended limitation period and penalties were held to be inapplicable.
Case Background
Appellant: Delphi Automotive Systems Pvt. Ltd. & its Directors
Nature of Imports: Goods imported by air on Ex-Works basis
Dispute: Incorrect computation of transport cost under Rule 10(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007
Duty Demanded: βΉ25.53 lakh
Penalties: Under Sections 114A and 114AA
Relevant Provisions:
Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 (Valuation)
Rule 10(2) of Valuation Rules (Inclusion of freight & insurance)
Fifth proviso to Rule 10(2) (Air freight cap at 20% of FOB value)
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 27.05.2025
CESTAT Bangalore Quashes SVB Valuation and Royalty Loading on Imports
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench allowed the appeal filed by M/s Chem Rend Chemicals Co. Pvt. Ltd., quashing the 100% loading of invoice value and rejection of declared transaction value on imports from its parent company, Chem Trend, USA. The Tribunal also set aside the addition of royalty under Rule 10(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.
Background of the Case
Appellant: Chem Rend Chemicals Co. Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore
Imported Goods: Industrial mould release agents and dye lubricants
Supplier: Related party β Chem Trend, USA
DRI/Customs Allegation: Declared value not at armβs length; addition of royalty payments to assessable value
SVB Order: 100% value loading and inclusion of royalty under Rule 10(1)(c)
Commissioner (Appeals) Decision: Set aside loading and royalty, but upheld rejection of declared value and remanded case for redetermination
CESTAT Appeal: Against partial rejection of declared value and remand for redetermination
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.
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 26.05.2025
Delhi High Court Quashes DRI Summons and Complaint in Foreign Currency Case
The Delhi High Court in CRL.M.C. 7919/2023 & CRL.M.A. 29532/2023 quashed the criminal complaint and the summoning order issued against Mr. Pawan Kant Munjal, Executive Chairman of Hero MotoCorp, by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The court held that the proceedings were based on a set of facts already conclusively adjudicated in favour of the petitioner, and continuing with the prosecution would amount to an abuse of process of law.
Complaint Filed By: Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI)
Subject: Alleged violation involving undeclared foreign currency seized from an aide during an international business trip in 2018
Key Event: Mr. Amit Bali, assistant of SEMPL (event coordinator), was found carrying undeclared currency amounting to approx. βΉ81 lakh
DRI Allegation: The currency belonged to Mr. Munjal and was exported illegally in contravention of the Customs Act and FEMA
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.
