Tag: #Exports

  • CESTAT Bangalore Allows Refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD)

    CESTAT Bangalore Allows Refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD)

    Date: 04.10.2025

    In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore, has delivered justice to M/s Tommy Hilfiger Arvind Fashion Pvt. Ltd., allowing their appeal for the refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid on imported readymade garments. ​ This decision marks a crucial win for importers navigating the complexities of customs duties and refund claims.

    M/s Tommy Hilfiger Arvind Fashion Pvt. ​ Ltd., a prominent importer and retailer of readymade garments, had paid SAD under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, on their imports. ​ The company subsequently sold these garments through its branches across India, paying VAT or Central Sales Tax (CST) as applicable. ​ To ensure proper tracking of the imported goods, the company employed a customized software system, ‘Voyager,’ which generated unique alpha-numeric codes for each item upon receipt at their warehouse. ​

    The appellant filed eight refund claims amounting to Rs. ​ 12,50,439/- under Notification No. ​ 102/2007-Cus., supported by requisite documents, including a Chartered Accountant (CA) certificate. ​ However, the claims were rejected by the adjudicating authority and later by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds that the description of goods in the bills of entry did not match the sales invoices, allegedly failing to establish a one-to-one correlation between the imported goods and those sold.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside Revocation of Customs Broker License

    CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside Revocation of Customs Broker License

    Date: 04.10.2025

    In a landmark decision, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has set aside the revocation of the Customs Broker (CB) license of M/s. ICS Cargo. ​ This case highlights the importance of adhering to procedural timelines and the need for evidence-based adjudication in regulatory matters. ​ The judgment, delivered on January 6, 2023, is a significant win for the appellant and underscores the principles of fairness and justice in administrative proceedings.

    M/s. ICS Cargo, a Customs House Agent (CHA), faced allegations of facilitating customs clearance for undervalued imports of power tools and other goods. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) alleged that the appellant had connived with importers to misuse Importer Exporter Codes (IEC) for monetary gain, violating the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations (CBLR), 2018. ​ Based on these allegations, the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), Delhi, revoked the appellant’s license, forfeited the security deposit, and imposed penalties. ​ The appellant challenged the revocation, arguing that the proceedings were barred by time and that the allegations were baseless and unsupported by evidence.

    Handy Download:

  • Bombay High Court Upholds Importers Right to Re-Testing of Seized Goods

    Bombay High Court Upholds Importers Right to Re-Testing of Seized Goods

    Date: 04.10.2025

    In a significant ruling by the Bombay High Court, the case of Appellant vs. Union of India & Others sheds light on the importance of trade facilitation measures and the Government of India’s commitment to the β€˜Ease of Doing Business’ policy. This judgment, addresses the contentious issue of re-testing seized goods and the procedural hurdles faced by importers.

    The petitioner, Appellant, a business proprietor, sought relief against the refusal by Customs Authorities to re-test seized cashew nuts. ​ The goods were initially tested in a Maharashtra laboratory, yielding favorable results. However, subsequent samples were sent to a Kerala laboratory, which reported adverse findings. ​ The petitioner argued that the refusal to re-test the goods in Maharashtra was unreasonable and contrary to the guidelines outlined in Public Notice No. 97 of 2017.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Delhi Upholds Correct Classification of Imported Vehicles

    CESTAT Delhi Upholds Correct Classification of Imported Vehicles

    Date: 03.10.2025

    In a significant victory for Polaris India Private Limited, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has ruled in favor of the company in a long-standing dispute over the classification of its imported vehicles. The case, which revolved around the classification of Polaris’ Ranger (non-electric), Ranger (electric), and Brutus vehicles, has been a contentious issue since 2019. The tribunal’s decision, delivered on July 3, 2023, sets a precedent for the interpretation of customs classifications for specialized vehicles.

    Polaris India, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Polaris Industries Inc., USA, imports All-Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) and other off-road vehicles designed for utility purposes. ​ Between 2013 and 2016, Polaris imported several models, including the Ranger (non-electric), Ranger (electric), and Brutus vehicles, classifying them under Customs Tariff Headings (CTH) 8704 and 8709, which pertain to vehicles designed for the transportation of goods. ​

    However, the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import), New Delhi, reclassified these vehicles under CTH 8703, which covers motor vehicles principally designed for the transportation of persons. ​This reclassification led to a demand for differential customs duty of Rs. ​ 41,61,609, along with penalties and fines. ​ Polaris India challenged this decision, asserting that their vehicles were primarily designed for transporting goods and performing utility functions.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Mumbai Quashes β‚Ή3.09 Crore Customs Duty Demand on Forklift Parts

    CESTAT Mumbai Quashes β‚Ή3.09 Crore Customs Duty Demand on Forklift Parts

    Date: 03.10.2025

    In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai, has set aside a demand for differential customs duty and penalties imposed on Jungheinrich Lift Truck India Pvt Ltd and other appellants. ​ The case revolved around the import of forklift parts and the applicability of additional duties of customs under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011. ​

    The dispute arose from the import of forklift parts by Jungheinrich Lift Truck India Pvt Ltd between June 2014 and June 2017 through the Air Cargo Complex (ACC), Mumbai, and Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House (JNCH), Nhava Sheva. ​ The customs authorities had re-determined the value of the imported goods and demanded a differential duty of β‚Ή3.09 crore for imports through ACC and β‚Ή7.75 lakh for imports through JNCH. ​ Additionally, penalties were imposed under Sections 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.

    The crux of the issue was whether the imported forklift parts were subject to the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, which mandate the declaration of a “retail sale price (RSP)” for pre-packaged commodities. ​ The customs authorities argued that the goods were liable for additional duties based on the RSP, while the appellants contended that the goods were not pre-packaged commodities intended for retail sale.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Bangalore Clarifies MRP-Based Assessment for Industrial Goods

    CESTAT Bangalore Clarifies MRP-Based Assessment for Industrial Goods

    Date: 03.10.2025

    In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore, has set aside the demand for differential customs duty of Rs. ​ 2.72 crore against M/s. ​ BEML Ltd., a leading manufacturer of industrial equipment. ​ The case, which revolved around the applicability of MRP-based assessment under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, highlights the nuanced interpretation of legal provisions governing industrial and retail sales. ​

    BEML Ltd., engaged in manufacturing heavy industrial equipment such as dumpers, motor graders, and Tatra trucks, imports spare parts and components for these products. ​ These imports are distributed to industrial consumers either directly or through their marketing network. ​ The dispute arose when the Customs Department alleged that BEML failed to discharge the applicable duty under Section 4A, which mandates MRP-based assessment for retail packages. ​ A demand notice was issued for the recovery of Rs. ​ 2.72 crore for the period April 2010 to November 2011, along with interest and penalties.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Delhi- Optical Network Cards Classified as Parts

    CESTAT Delhi- Optical Network Cards Classified as Parts

    Date: 01.10.2025

    In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has set aside the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, bringing relief to M/s Fiberhome India Private Limited. The case revolved around the classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1965, and the denial of exemption benefits. ​ This decision not only clarifies the classification of certain telecom equipment but also sets a precedent for similar disputes in the future. ​

    Fiberhome India, a manufacturer of Optical Transport Network (OTN) equipment, had imported various cards, modules, and routers used as parts of OTN systems. The company classified these goods under Customs Tariff Items (CTI) 8517 70 10 and 8517 70 90, claiming them as parts of OTN equipment. ​ However, the Principal Commissioner reclassified these goods under CTI 8517 62 90, treating them as independent apparatus/machines, thereby denying exemption benefits and imposing higher customs duties. ​ The dispute involved 133 Bills of Entry assessed at IGI Airport, Delhi, and ICD Tughlakabad, and raised critical questions about the classification of goods as parts versus independent apparatus.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Hyderabad- Carbon & Sulphur Analyzer Not Classifiable as Gas Analysis Apparatus

    CESTAT Hyderabad- Carbon & Sulphur Analyzer Not Classifiable as Gas Analysis Apparatus

    Date: 30.09.2025

    In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Regional Bench at Hyderabad has resolved a long-standing classification dispute concerning the import of the β€˜Carbon and Sulphur Analyzer CS-800’ by Verder Scientific Pvt Ltd. The case revolved around whether the apparatus should be classified under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 90271000 as a β€˜Gas or Smoke Analysis Apparatus’ or under a different heading. ​ The Tribunal’s decision has set a precedent for similar classification disputes in the future.

    The appellant, Verder Scientific Pvt Ltd, challenged the classification of their imported analyzer under CTH 90271000, as upheld by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). ​ The apparatus in question is used to determine the presence of carbon and sulphur elements in solid metal samples. ​ The Commissioner (Appeals) had classified the product as a β€˜Gas or Smoke Analysis Apparatus,’ arguing that the apparatus analyzes gases released during the combustion of metal samples.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Mumbai set aside the revised assessable value

    CESTAT Mumbai set aside the revised assessable value

    Date: 30.09.2025

    In a landmark decision, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai, has set aside the revision of assessable value in the case of Nilkamal Limited. This judgment, delivered on September 29, 2025, highlights critical issues surrounding the valuation of imported goods under the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. The case revolved around the rejection of declared values for imported wooden furniture and sofa sets from Malaysia and China, and the subsequent reassessment by customs authorities. ​

    Nilkamal Limited imported consignments of wooden furniture and sofa sets from Malaysia and China between September and November 2012. ​ The customs authorities rejected the declared transaction values, citing lack of comparability with contemporaneous imports. ​ They revised the assessable value using a “price factor” based on the weight of the furniture, which was derived from the unit quantity code (UQC) specified in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. This reassessment was challenged by Nilkamal Limited, leading to the appeals before the Tribunal.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Delhi Ruled on Customs Valuation of Imported Software

    CESTAT Delhi Ruled on Customs Valuation of Imported Software

    Date: 30.09.2025

    In a significant judgment, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has delivered a landmark decision in favor of HCL Technologies Ltd. and SAP India Pvt. Ltd., setting aside penalties and customs duty demands imposed by the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), New Delhi. This case, which revolved around the valuation of imported software CDs and the inclusion of license fees in their transaction value, has far-reaching implications for the IT and software industry. ​

    The dispute arose when HCL Technologies imported CDs containing SAP software from SAP Germany, facilitated by SAP India. ​ The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) alleged that the declared transaction value of the CDs was understated and sought to include the license fees paid by HCL to SAP India in the valuation of the CDs under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. ​ Penalties were also imposed on both HCL and SAP India under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.

    Handy Download: