ALO Partners Logo

π€πšππ«π’π€πšπš π‹πšπ° 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐒𝐜𝐞𝐬 (π€π‹πŽ)

Tag: #Customs

  • CESTAT Mumbai- Section 114A penalty is not sustainable in absence of culpability

    CESTAT Mumbai- Section 114A penalty is not sustainable in absence of culpability

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 21.05.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai- Section 114A penalty is not sustainable in absence of culpability

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench, in its final order dated 13th May 2025, allowed the appeal filed by M/s Apar Industries Ltd., quashing a customs duty demand of β‚Ή71.05 lakhs, redemption fine of β‚Ή25 lakhs, and penalties imposed under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962.

    The Tribunal held that DEPB scrips used for imports prior to their cancellation remain valid, and any demand raised after their cancellation cannot retrospectively affect lawful imports.

    Background of the Case

    • Appellant: M/s Apar Industries Ltd., Mumbai
    • Issue: Customs demand and penalty based on use of DEPB scrips alleged to be fraudulently obtained by original holders
    • Notification Involved: Customs Exemption Notification No. 34/97-Cus. dated 07.04.1997
    • Period of Dispute: Imports during July to November 1998
    • Show Cause Notice Issued: 30.09.2002
    • Duty Demanded: β‚Ή71,05,031
    • Redemption Fine: β‚Ή25,00,000
    • Penalty Imposed: β‚Ή25,00,000 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 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 Ahmedabad held that verified COO and compliance with SAFTA conditions was sufficient

    CESTAT Ahmedabad held that verified COO and compliance with SAFTA conditions was sufficient

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 20.05.2025

    CESTAT Ahmedabad held that verified COO and compliance with SAFTA conditions was sufficient

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad, has allowed the appeal of M/s Kesar Spices against the denial of exemption under Notification No. 99/2011-Cus for imports made under the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) framework.

    Background of the Case

    • Importer: Kesar Spices, Ahmedabad
    • Goods: Walnuts in shell (101,250 kg)
    • Exemption Claimed Under: Notification No. 99/2011-Cus read with Notification No. 75/2006-Cus
    • Country of Origin Declared: Afghanistan
    • Exporting Firm: M/s Kalimullah Hidayat Afghan Ltd., Kandahar, Afghanistan
    • Key Allegation: Misdeclaration of U.S. origin goods as Afghan-origin to avail duty concession
    • Demand Raised:
      • Customs Duty: β‚Ή2.01 crores
      • Redemption Fine and Penalty under Sections 111(m), 111(o), 112, 114A, 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 Ahmedabad

    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 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 Kolkata- Lemoneez is rightly classifiable under CTH 20093100

    CESTAT Kolkata- Lemoneez is rightly classifiable under CTH 20093100

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 17.05.2025

    CESTAT Kolkata- Lemoneez is rightly classifiable under CTH 20093100

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata, delivered a landmark decision on 8th May 2025, resolving a long-standing customs classification dispute involving Dabur India Limited. The case revolved around the classification of β€œLemoneez,” a lemon juice concentrate imported from Nepal.

    Background of the Dispute

    Dabur India Ltd., represented along with their Custom House Agent (CHA),had classified Lemoneez under Tariff Item 2202 99 20, attracting IGST @12%, while importing from Nepal. However, a revenue alert triggered by DGARM alleged underpayment of duty and contended that the product was incorrectly classified. The Department claimed the product should fall under Heading 2106, which attracts IGST @18%. A Show Cause Notice followed, culminating in the Order-in-Original dated 29.11.2024 by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Patna, confirming a differential tax demand of β‚Ή1.05 crores, interest, and 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 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 Ahmedabad Upholds Classification of Petroleum Solvent as Freely Importable

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Upholds Classification of Petroleum Solvent as Freely Importable

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 16.05.2025

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Upholds Classification of Petroleum Solvent as Freely Importable

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad Bench has delivered a significant judgment in Customs Appeal No. 11476/2017, setting aside the confiscation and penalty orders imposed on Gastrade International. The core issue pertained to the correct classification of imported Petroleum Hydrocarbon Solvent (125/240) Grade MTOβ€”whether it should be treated as a freely importable product or a restricted one requiring State Trading Enterprise (STE) import route.

    Case Snapshot

    • Importer: Gastrade International, Gandhidham
    • Product: Petroleum Hydrocarbon Solvent (MTO grade)
    • Declared Classification: CTH 2710 19 90 (β€œOthers” – freely importable)
    • Customs Reclassification: CTH 2710 12 90 (β€œLight oils and preparations” – restricted)
    • Penalty and Fine Imposed: β‚Ή15 lakh (fine), β‚Ή7.5 lakh (penalty) under Sections 111(d), 111(m), 112(a)(i)

    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 DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

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

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Hyderabad Quashes Rs. 63 Crore Demand on Diamond India Ltd for Gold Replenishment under FTP

    CESTAT Hyderabad Quashes Rs. 63 Crore Demand on Diamond India Ltd for Gold Replenishment under FTP

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 15.05.2025

    CESTAT Hyderabad Quashes Rs. 63 Crore Demand on Diamond India Ltd for Gold Replenishment under FTP

    The Hyderabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) delivered a landmark ruling in a batch of appeals involving Diamond India Ltd (DIL), Bullionline LLP, Jurassic Refiners & Jewels Pvt Ltd, and their officials. The dispute revolved around the replenishment of duty-free gold under the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2015–20, alleging violations of Notification No. 57/2000-Cus.

    Background of the Dispute

    The exporters Bullionline LLP and Jurassic Refiners exported gold jewellery (kadas) and received duty-free gold from DIL, a DGFT-nominated agency, under the FTP’s replenishment scheme. DRI alleged:

    • The jewellery was not manufactured through the fully mechanized process as claimed (which would require only 2% value addition), but rather semi-mechanized, requiring 3.5% value addition.
    • The exporters used notional values and misdeclared making charges to falsely show compliance.
    • DIL failed to conduct due diligence before releasing replenishment gold, leading to duty evasion of β‚Ή63.74 crore.

    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 Hyderabad

    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- Classification under CTH 95062900 upheld for swim seats, arm bands, fins, and paddles

    CESTAT Chennai- Classification under CTH 95062900 upheld for swim seats, arm bands, fins, and paddles

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 14.05.2025

    CESTAT Chennai- Classification under CTH 95062900 upheld for swim seats, arm bands, fins, and paddles

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, ruled in favour of M/s. Page Industries Ltd., setting aside the reclassification orders passed by lower authorities and confirming that various imported swimming aids and accessories were appropriately classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 95062900 as water sports equipment.

    Case Background

    • Importer: M/s. Page Industries Ltd., Bengaluru
    • Disputed Goods: Sea Squad Swim Seats, Arm Bands, Bio-Fuse Fitness Fins, Swimming Goggles, Headgear, and Fabric Hats (under the Speedo brand)
    • Original Claim: Classification under CTH 95062900 with applicable duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012 (Sl. No. 503)
    • Department’s Reclassification: CTH 39269099 (articles of plastic) or CTH 95069990 (other sports equipment)
    • Key Contention: Whether the imported goods qualify as water sports equipment eligible for concessional customs duty

    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 Kolkata Upholds Bed Sheet Classification Under CTH 6304

    CESTAT Kolkata Upholds Bed Sheet Classification Under CTH 6304

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 13.05.2025

    CESTAT Kolkata Upholds Bed Sheet Classification Under CTH 6304

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench, dismissed the Department’s appeal and affirmed the classification adopted by Silpha Finvest Pvt. Ltd. for imported bed sheets made of 100% polyester. The Tribunal held that the goods were rightly classified under CTH 6304 and not under CTH 5407, rejecting the Revenue’s charge of misdeclaration and its demand for penalty and redemption fine.

    Case Snapshot

    • Importer: Silpha Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata
    • Goods: Bed sheets made of 100% polyester
    • Declared Classification: CTH 6304 (Bedspreads & other furnishing articles)
    • Department’s Reclassification: CTH 5407 (Woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn)
    • Show Cause Notice: Alleged misdeclaration and suppression
    • Adjudication Result: Classification changed; goods confiscated; duty, fine, and penalty imposed

    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- Department’s attempt to reclassify under 8543 deemed unwarranted and unsupported

    CESTAT Bangalore- Department’s attempt to reclassify under 8543 deemed unwarranted and unsupported

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 12.05.2025

    CESTAT Bangalore- Department’s attempt to reclassify under 8543 deemed unwarranted and unsupported

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench, dismissed the Department’s appeal in the case of Next Education India Pvt. Ltd., affirming the classification of student interactive response systems under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8471 60 29.

    Case Background:

    • Importer: Next Education India Pvt. Ltd., Kochi
    • Imported Goods: Student Interactive Response Systems (keypads and IR receivers)
    • Original Classification (By Importer): CTH 8471 60 29 – input/output units of ADP machines
    • Revised Classification (By Department): CTH 8543 70 99 – electrical apparatus with individual function
    • Disputed Duty: Arising from denial of exemption applicable to ADP-related products

    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

  • CESTAT Mumbai Orders Refund of SAD

    CESTAT Mumbai Orders Refund of SAD

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 10.05.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai Orders Refund of SAD

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench, has ruled in favor of Varian Medical Systems International (India) Pvt. Ltd., ordering the refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) amounting to β‚Ή2,87,801. The appeal arose after the refund was rejected by both the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the duty was paid by DHL and not by the appellant.

    Case Summary

    • Appellant: Varian Medical Systems International (India) Pvt. Ltd.
    • Refund Claim: β‚Ή2,87,801/- for SAD under three Bills of Entry dated April–June 2017
    • Original Authority’s Rejection: Claimed refund was rejected on the ground that the SAD was paid by DHL
    • Ground for Appeal: TR-6 challans showed the appellant’s name as importer, proving they bore the duty burden

    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