ALO Partners Logo

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

Tag: #CESTATNewDelhi

  • CESTAT Delhi Sets aside Enhanced valuation, penalty, and redemption fine

    CESTAT Delhi Sets aside Enhanced valuation, penalty, and redemption fine

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 19.05.2025

    CESTAT Delhi Sets aside Enhanced valuation, penalty, and redemption fine

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi allowed the appeal filed by Krishna Impex International, quashing the allegations of customs duty evasion, undervaluation, and associated penalties. The Tribunal held that the department failed to follow mandatory procedures under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, before rejecting the declared value of imported goods.

    Background of the Case

    • Appellant: Krishna Impex International, Delhi
    • Dispute Origin: DRI search operation in 2008 alleging undervaluation of imported Tussah Silk Yarn from China
    • Key Trigger: Statement by proprietor Shri Amarnath Jhunjhunwala admitting possible undervaluation
    • Goods Assessed Under: Multiple Bills of Entry from 2005 to 2008
    • Key Legal Provisions Invoked by Customs:
      • Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962
      • Rule 4 and Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988
      • Penalties under Sections 112(a), 114A, 114AA, and redemption fine

    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 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 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

  • CESTAT New Delhi Quashes Customs Order Due to Inordinate Delay in Adjudication

    CESTAT New Delhi Quashes Customs Order Due to Inordinate Delay in Adjudication

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 22.04.2025

    CESTAT New Delhi Quashes Customs Order Due to Inordinate Delay in Adjudication

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi Principal Bench, has set aside a 2023 customs adjudication order issued against Innovale Investment Pte Ltd, ruling that the inordinate delay of nearly 10 years in adjudicating a show cause notice rendered the proceedings unsustainable in law.

    Case Overview:

    • The dispute pertained to the import of an Embraer Phenom 100 aircraft under Bill of Entry No. 269117 dated 24.06.2011.
    • The aircraft was provisionally released against a bond and bank guarantee of β‚Ή4.10 crore.
    • Customs authorities alleged misuse of exemption under Notification No. 01/2002-Cus as amended by Notification 01/2011-Cus, and issued a show cause notice on 31.07.2013.
    • On 19.01.2023, the Principal Commissioner of Customs ordered:
      • Confiscation of the aircraft under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act.
      • Redemption fine of β‚Ή1 crore under Section 125.
      • Penalty of β‚Ή25 lakh under Section 112(a).

    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 Reader for Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT New Delhi Reinforces that interest in delayed IGST payments must be computed using CGST framework provisions, not the customs law

    CESTAT New Delhi Reinforces that interest in delayed IGST payments must be computed using CGST framework provisions, not the customs law

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 18.4.2025

    CESTAT New Delhi Reinforces that interest in delayed IGST payments must be computed using CGST framework provisions, not the customs law

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, recently delivered a significant judgment in the case of M/s JLC Electromet Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jodhpur. ​ This decision sheds light on the nuanced distinction between Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and Additional Duty of Customs, as well as the applicability of interest on delayed IGST payments. ​ Let’s dive into the details of this case and its implications.

    Background of the Case

    The appellant, M/s JLC Electromet Pvt. ​ Ltd., imported goods under 13 Advance Authorizations, availing exemptions from Basic Customs Duty (BCD) and IGST. ​ However, the Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) found that the exemption from IGST was incorrectly claimed, as the appellant did not fulfill the “actual user” condition required under the scheme. ​ Upon being notified, the appellant paid the IGST along with interest.

    The dispute arose over the interest payment. ​ The appellant argued that IGST, being an Additional Duty of Customs, should not attract interest under the provisions of the Customs Act, citing precedents from the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court. ​ The Commissioner of Customs, however, appropriated the interest paid by the appellant, leading to this appeal.

    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 Reader for Download:

    ALO Document 18.04.2025Download

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

    www.aadrikaalaw.com