𝐀𝐚𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐚𝐚 𝐋𝐚𝐰 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 (𝐀𝐋𝐎)

Tag: #Customs

CESTAT Ahmedabad Upholds Carrier Rights under SCMTR 2018
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 11.06.2025

CESTAT Ahmedabad Upholds Carrier Rights under SCMTR 2018

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad allowed the appeal of M/s ASR India Pvt. Ltd., a shipping line operating at Mundra Port, quashing the revocation of its registration as an authorized carrier under the Sea Cargo Manifest and Transhipment Regulations (SCMTR), 2018. The case involved complex issues around container detention charges, regulatory compliance, and procedural fairness under Customs law.

Background of the Case
- The dispute arose after the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Mundra, issued a Show Cause Notice on 25 November 2024 to ASR India for alleged violations of Regulations 10(1)(l) and 10(1)(m) of SCMTR, 2018.
- The company’s registration as an authorized carrier was revoked effective 8 April 2025, and a penalty of ₹50,000 was imposed.
ASR India filed an appeal before the CESTAT and was granted interim stay on the revocation order.

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 Ahmedabad

Disclaimer

Handy Download:

ALO Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 11, 2025
CESTAT Chennai Upholds Target Plus Scheme Benefits

ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 10.06.2025

CESTAT Chennai Upholds Target Plus Scheme Benefits

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai dismissed five appeals filed by the Revenue against M/s Shakthi Knitting Ltd. and its directors. The core issue revolved around the alleged misuse of the Target Plus Scheme (TPS) through import of plastic granules purportedly unrelated to their exported product—ready-made garments.

Background of the Case

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) initiated an investigation alleging that Shakthi Knitting Ltd. misused the TPS license to import PP/PE plastic granules, claiming they lacked a “broad nexus” with the exported garments. The DRI further alleged misrepresentation in export data submitted to DGFT, and sought cancellation/modification of the license under Notification No. 32/2005-Cus. and Circular 21/2007-Cus..

However, the DGFT itself responded in writing that the duty credit was rightly issued under the Target Plus Scheme, confirming compliance with the FTP norms.

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 DOCUMENT Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com

June 10, 2025
CESTAT Ahmedabad Trade Discounts Are Not Taxable Services
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 10.06.2025

CESTAT Ahmedabad Trade Discounts Are Not Taxable Services

The CESTAT Ahmedabad bench allowed the appeal of M/s Akshita Exports, setting aside a demand of over ₹32 lakhs in service tax, interest, and penalties.

The case revolved around the deduction of foreign commission in export invoices, which the Department alleged was taxable under Business Auxiliary Services (Section 65(105)(zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994). However, the Tribunal ruled that no such tax was applicable since there was no contract or payment made to any foreign commission agent by the appellant.

Background of the Dispute
- Akshita Exports exported goods between 2008–2009 and 2011–2012, with export invoices reflecting commission amounts deducted from the gross value.
- The foreign buyers paid the net invoice amount after deducting these commissions.
- The Department claimed the deductions constituted consideration for services rendered by foreign agents, thereby attracting service tax under reverse charge.
- The appellant contended that no foreign agent was engaged or paid directly, and the deductions were standard trade discounts to buyers.
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 Ahmedabad

Disclaimer

Handy Download:

ALO DOCUMENT Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 10, 2025
CESTAT Mumbai- Country of Origin Cannot Be Judged by Packaging Labels
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 10.06.2025

CESTAT Mumbai- Country of Origin Cannot Be Judged by Packaging Labels

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai, set aside the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), which had upheld penalties, fine, and re-assessment against Caliber International and its partners. The issue involved allegations of misdeclaration of country of origin for imported dry dates, with Customs claiming the goods were of Pakistan origin, not UAE origin as declared.

Case Background
- Goods Involved: Dry Dates
- Declared Country of Origin: United Arab Emirates
- Allegation: Goods were actually from Pakistan, attracting 200% BCD
- Self-Assessment: Under CTI 0804 1030 with 20% BCD and 12% IGST
- Customs Demand: Reclassification under CTI 9806 0000 with 200% BCD
- Penalty Imposed: Under Sections 112(a)(ii), 114AA of the Customs Act
Customs relied primarily on jute bag tags that indicated manufacturing origins from Pakistan (e.g., “Sargodha Jute Mills”), despite documentary proof from Dubai Chamber of Commerce, UAE port authorities, and plant quarantine certification affirming UAE as the origin.

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 Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 10, 2025
CESTAT New Delhi Rejects DRI’s Undervaluation Claim
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 09.06.2025

CESTAT New Delhi Rejects DRI’s Undervaluation Claim

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has set aside the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) that confirmed undervaluation and duty evasion charges against M/s EDAG Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. and its foreign parent EDAG Germany, along with its officials.

The Tribunal categorically held that there was no additional consideration paid for the imported goods and no legal basis for rejecting the declared transaction value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.

Case Background
- Turnkey Contract: EDAG India entered a ₹22.21 crore turnkey project with Ford India to set up a plant in Chennai, with 49% as import content.
- Allegation: Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) alleged that EDAG undervalued imports by ₹6.97 crore, supported by a cancelled invoice of €1 million from EDAG Germany.
- Action Taken: A detailed SCN was issued in 2009 followed by a common adjudication in 2010, resulting in demands for differential duty, interest, confiscation of goods, and personal penalties.
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 Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 9, 2025
CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside Penalty in DEPB Export Valuation
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 09.06.2025

CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside Penalty in DEPB Export Valuation

The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has quashed the ₹10 lakh penalty imposed on him under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The penalty stemmed from alleged involvement in a major export overvaluation case under the DEPB scheme.

Background of the Case

The case revolves around alleged fraudulent exports of CD-ROMs by M/s. Sundram Export Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Netcompware Pvt. Ltd., who were accused of inflating Freight on Board (FOB) value to wrongfully avail DEPB (Duty Entitlement Pass Book) benefits.
- Allegation: Exports were declared at an inflated rate of $19 per CD-ROM, far exceeding actual value.
- Objective: To fraudulently earn DEPB scrips, later used to import goods duty-free.
- Appellant’s Alleged Role: Accused of orchestrating the export of CD-ROMs and re-importation under a new entity, M/s. Arvind International.
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 Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 9, 2025
CESTAT Mumbai Quashes Customs Duty Demand on Gold Jewellery Imports Under India–Thailand FTA
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 09.06.2025

CESTAT Mumbai Quashes Customs Duty Demand on Gold Jewellery Imports Under India–Thailand FTA

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai has set aside the denial of concessional customs duty benefits to importers of gold jewellery from Thailand under the India–Thailand Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The Tribunal held that customs authorities cannot unilaterally reject the Certificate of Origin (CoO) issued by the exporting country without following the designated verification mechanism under the FTA framework.

This landmark decision comes as a relief to several importers who were denied preferential duty benefits despite submitting valid CoOs issued by the Thai authorities.

Background of the Dispute
- Multiple importers imported gold jewellery from Thailand, availing concessional duty benefits under the India–Thailand Early Harvest Scheme of the FTA.
- The Customs Department rejected the declared origin, citing improper documentation and alleged non-fulfilment of origin criteria, and demanded differential duty along with interest and penalties.
- The Department proceeded without referring the matter to the Designated Authority in Thailand as per the dispute resolution procedure of the FTA.
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 Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 9, 2025
CESTAT Chennai Dismisses Revenue Appeal in Target Plus Scheme Dispute
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 08.06.2025

CESTAT Chennai Dismisses Revenue Appeal in Target Plus Scheme Dispute

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench – Court No. III has dismissed the Revenue’s appeal against M/s. Bharat Industrial Enterprises Ltd. (BIEL). The tribunal upheld the importer’s claim for duty exemption under the Target Plus Scheme (TPS), marking a significant judgment on the scope of “actual user” and “broad nexus” in post-export incentive schemes.

Case Background
- Respondent: M/s. Bharat Industrial Enterprises Ltd. (BIEL), New Delhi
- Appellant: Commissioner of Customs (Airport), Chennai
- Dispute: Use of Target Plus Licences to import plastic granules (e.g., HDPE, LDPE, PP) through high seas sales, where the imported goods were allegedly not used in BIEL’s exported product (rice).
- Revenue’s Claim: Misuse of TPS benefits due to lack of actual use of imported plastic granules in the exported rice products; alleged violation of Para 3.7.6 of FTP 2004–09, Notification No. 32/2005-Cus., and Customs Circulars 21/2007 and 45/2007.
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 Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 8, 2025
CESTAT Delhi Clears HP India in Misdeclaration Allegation on Laptop Imports
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 07.06.2025

CESTAT Delhi Clears HP India in Misdeclaration Allegation on Laptop Imports

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi has delivered a favorable verdict for HP India Sales Pvt. Ltd., setting aside a ₹2.8 crore duty demand and penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva, in a case involving alleged misdeclaration of imported laptops intended for after-sales warranty service.

Background of the Dispute
- HP India had imported 1113 laptop units of various models through Nhava Sheva port, declaring them as warranty support stock, intended exclusively for after-sales service and not for retail sale.
- Customs authorities alleged misdeclaration of model numbers and invoked extended limitation under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, claiming that the laptops were not eligible for concessional duty.
- A Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued demanding differential duty of ₹2,80,21,293 along with interest and penalty under Section 114A.
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 Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 7, 2025
CESTAT Ahmedabad Upholds Correct Classification of Pre-Painted Galvanized Steel under CTH 7210
ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 07.06.2025

CESTAT Ahmedabad Upholds Correct Classification of Pre-Painted Galvanized Steel under CTH 7210

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad, has ruled in favor of the appellant-importer, KLJ Polymers & Chemicals Limited, setting aside a reclassification attempt and differential duty demand initiated by the customs department. The dispute revolved around whether the imported product—Pre-painted Galvanized Steel Sheets—should be classified under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 7210 70, as declared by the importer, or under CTH 7225 99, as proposed by the department on grounds of alleged alloy content.

Dispute Summary
- Product: Colour-coated galvanized steel coils/sheets.
- Declared Classification by Importer: CTH 7210 (covering flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, plated or coated).
- Revenue’s Allegation: The product contains alloying elements (including boron), qualifying it under CTH 7225 for other alloy steel.
The customs authorities alleged suppression of facts and misdeclaration by the importer and raised a demand of differential duty, invoking extended limitation under Section 28 of the Customs Act.

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 Ahmedabad

Disclaimer

Handy Download:

ALO Document Download

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

www.aadrikaalaw.com
June 7, 2025