ALS

π€πšππ«π’π€πšπš π‹πžπ πšπ₯ π’πžπ«π―π’πœπžπ¬ (𝐀𝐋𝐒)

Tag: #CESTATDelhi

  • CESTAT Delhi- Honest Valuation Error Not Penalized

    CESTAT Delhi- Honest Valuation Error Not Penalized

    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 β‚Ή25,53,891 and penalties imposed under Sections 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.

    The Tribunal held that the valuation errorβ€”treating Ex-Works prices as FOB for air importsβ€”was 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: β‚Ή25.53 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.

    Source: CESTAT 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 Delhi- Import of MEK-Based Ink Does Not Require Narcotics NOC

    CESTAT Delhi- Import of MEK-Based Ink Does Not Require Narcotics NOC

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 26.05.2025

    CESTAT Delhi- Import of MEK-Based Ink Does Not Require Narcotics NOC

    The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, allowed the appeal of M/s Videojet Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd., holding that the import of ink and ink consumables containing Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) does not require a No Objection Certificate (NOC) under the NDPS Act, 1985. The Tribunal set aside the confiscation, reclassification, and penalties imposed by Customs under Sections 111(d), 112, and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.

    Background of the Case

    • Importer: M/s Videojet Technologies (I) Pvt. Ltd.
    • Goods Imported: Ink and ink-related consumables containing MEK (35% to 99%)
    • Customs Action:
      • Goods seized by the Preventive Commissionerate, New Delhi
      • Reclassified from Chapter 32 (inks) to CTI 29141200 (MEK)
      • Confiscation ordered under Section 111(d)
      • Penalties of β‚Ή10 lakhs under Section 112 and β‚Ή25 lakhs under Section 114AA

    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 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 Delhi Grants Exemption to Samsung India on Display Assemblies

    CESTAT Delhi Grants Exemption to Samsung India on Display Assemblies

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 23.05.2025

    CESTAT Delhi Grants Exemption to Samsung India on Display Assemblies

    The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, ruled in favor of Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., setting aside customs duty demands raised by the department. The case revolved around whether the imported Mechanical Electrical Assembly (MEA) Front used in high-end smartphones like Galaxy Note 10 qualifies for basic customs duty exemption under Serial No. 6(a)(iv) of Notification No. 57/2017-Cus, which covers β€œDisplay Assembly” for mobile phones.

    The Tribunal held that Samsung’s imported Assembly Front meets the criteria of β€œDisplay Assembly” and therefore qualifies for the exemption, rejecting the department’s interpretation that the inclusion of components like battery or receiver disqualified it from the benefit.

    Background of the Case

    • Appellant: Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
    • Issue: Rejection of exemption claimed on MEA Front assemblies used in smartphone manufacturing
    • Exemption Notification: Serial No. 6(a)(iv) of Notification No. 57/2017-Cus (as amended)
    • Goods in Question: MEA Front containing display, sub-PCBA, non-detachable battery, and waterproofing elements
    • Department’s View: Product does not qualify as β€œDisplay Assembly” since it contains additional sub-parts
    • Total Appeals: 26 (including Customs Appeal No. 51162/2022 and 25 related matters)

    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 Delhi

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

    www.aadrikaalaw.com