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: #LegalView

  • CESTAT Ahmedabad- SEZ Re-Export Goods Not Liable for Confiscation

    CESTAT Ahmedabad- SEZ Re-Export Goods Not Liable for Confiscation

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 10.07.2025

    CESTAT Ahmedabad- SEZ Re-Export Goods Not Liable for Confiscation

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad, vide Final Order No. 10546/2025 dated 09.07.2025, delivered by Hon’ble Judicial Member, quashed the confiscation and penalty proceedings initiated against Flamingo Logistics, a warehousing service provider operating in the Kandla Special Economic Zone (SEZ).

    Case Background

    Flamingo Logistics, acting on behalf of its client M/s. M A Value Smart Trading Limited (Hong Kong), filed four warehousing bills of entry with SEZ Customs for storing consignments including hard disks, mini tower computer cases, and motherboards. Upon examination, Customs authorities observed dust and scratches on the goods and, based on HP India’s opinion, classified them as β€œused” or β€œsecond-hand” goods.

    Relying on DGFT Notification No. 35(RE-2012)/2009-2014 and para 2.31 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), Customs seized the goods citing import restrictions on second-hand items. While permitting re-export, the adjudicating authority imposed fines and penalties under Sections 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 on Flamingo Logistics.

    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

  • Allahabad High Court- Roasted Areca Nuts Classified Under CTH 20081920

    Allahabad High Court- Roasted Areca Nuts Classified Under CTH 20081920

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 09.07.2025

    Allahabad High Court- Roasted Areca Nuts Classified Under CTH 20081920

    The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has quashed the customs department’s seizure and upheld the classification of roasted areca nuts under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 2008 19 20, rejecting the department’s bid to treat them as dried areca nuts under CTH 0802 80.

    The case is a significant win for importers, especially those in the agro-commodity business, as it reinforces the legal status of Customs Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR) and stresses strict adherence to procedural fairness.

    Background & Dispute

    The petitioner, M/s Rawder Petroleum Pvt. Ltd., imported roasted areca nuts from Indonesia based on an Advance Ruling dated 19.09.2024 obtained from CAAR, New Delhi, which classified the product under CTH 2008 19 20. The Department of Customs, however, challenged this ruling in appellate proceedings and seized the goods, claiming they were dried areca nuts falling under CTH 0802 80, based on test reports from CRCL, New Delhi.

    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: Allahabad High Court

    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 Allows Cross-Examination in Customs Dispute

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Allows Cross-Examination in Customs Dispute

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 09.07.2025

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Allows Cross-Examination in Customs Dispute

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad has ruled in favour of Kudrat Corporation, allowing their request for cross-examination of departmental witnesses in a customs adjudication proceeding.

    This judgment fortifies the principle that adjudicating authorities cannot deny cross-examination merely on assumptions, especially when statements, technical reports, or letters are relied upon in a Show Cause Notice (SCN).

    Case Background

    The dispute arose from the denial of cross-examination of 11 witnesses by the Principal Commissioner during the adjudication of a Show Cause Notice dated 03 July 2019, which was issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Principal Commissioner rejected the request on the ground that no new facts were likely to emerge, and that the cross-examination would only cause delays.

    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

  • CESTAT Mumbai Set Aside the Confiscation and Penalties in Warehousing Dispute

    CESTAT Mumbai Set Aside the Confiscation and Penalties in Warehousing Dispute

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 09.07.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai Set Aside the Confiscation and Penalties in Warehousing Dispute

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai set aside the confiscation of goods and penalties imposed on Akshay Logistics, a licensed public warehouse operator under Section 57 of the Customs Act, 1962.

    This decision not only provides relief to the appellant but also offers critical judicial interpretation on warehousing compliance, penalty provisions, and the scope of customs powers in bonded warehousing operations.

    Background of the Case

    The dispute arose after customs officials visited the appellant’s premises between 28 August and 5 September 2023, alleging various infractions including improper storage and violation of warehousing conditions. This led to the confiscation of goods worth β‚Ή9.36 crores under Section 111(j) and imposition of penalties under Sections 112 and 117 of the Customs Act, 1962.

    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 Holds Customs Notification

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Holds Customs Notification

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 08.07.2025

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Holds Customs Notification

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad has allowed the appeal of Patanjali Foods Limited, holding that Customs Notification No. 46/2015-Cus dated 17.09.2015 became effective only on 21.09.2015β€”the date it was offered for saleβ€”rather than its issuance date.

    Background: The Customs Duty Dispute

    The dispute centered around a 5% increase in customs duty introduced by Notification No. 46/2015-Cus, issued on 17th September 2015. Patanjali Foods challenged the retrospective imposition of higher duty, asserting that their goods were cleared on 18th September 2015β€”before the notification was legally enforceable. They cited Section 25(4)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (as it existed then), which clearly provided that a notification becomes enforceable only when published and offered for sale by the Directorate of Publicity and Public Relations of CBIC.

    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 Allahabad Overturns Penalty in Gold Smuggling

    CESTAT Allahabad Overturns Penalty in Gold Smuggling

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 08.07.2025

    CESTAT Allahabad Overturns Penalty in Gold Smuggling

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad, has allowed a batch of five appeals involving allegations of gold smuggling and has set aside the penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The case revolved around the alleged recovery of over 2.2 kg of gold from two individuals purportedly acting under instructions from the so-called “Verma Brothers.”

    Background of the Case

    The case originated from a Customs Preventive operation on 30.03.2019 at Cheoki Railway Station, Prayagraj, where two individualsβ€”Appellantsβ€”were allegedly found in possession of gold bars weighing 2.2 kg, valued at β‚Ή72.2 lakhs. The authorities claimed the gold was smuggled into India through Bangladesh via Kolkata. Based on their alleged confessional statements, Customs extended its investigation to include Appellants (collectively referred to as the “Verma Brothers”), imposing penalties of β‚Ή25 lakhs each on them and β‚Ή5 lakhs each on Appellants.

    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 Allahabad

    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 Upholds Duty Exemption for Phoenix Medicare

    CESTAT Bangalore Upholds Duty Exemption for Phoenix Medicare

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 08.07.2025

    CESTAT Bangalore Upholds Duty Exemption for Phoenix Medicare

    Background

    Phoenix Medicare Pvt. Ltd. imported autosuture surgical tools such as staplers, trocars, and protak devices, classifying them under CTH 9018 9099 and claimed concessional duty benefits under:

    • Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 01.03.2002 (Sl. No. 82, List 37)
    • Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 (Sl. No. 61(b))

    The assessing officer denied the exemption, contending that the goods were surgical toolsβ€”not accessoriesβ€”and hence were not covered under the relevant notifications.

    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 Chennai- Exemption Upheld in Marble Slabs Classification Dispute

    CESTAT Chennai- Exemption Upheld in Marble Slabs Classification Dispute

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 07.07.2025

    CESTAT Chennai- Exemption Upheld in Marble Slabs Classification Dispute

    Case Background

    The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) alleged that the appellants wrongly classified polished (honed) marble slabs under CTH 6802 2110 and availed exemption under Notification No. 04/2006-CE, whereas the goods were allegedly classifiable under CTH 6802 2190, attracting a higher rate of CVD (16%).

    The adjudicating authority reclassified the goods, raised differential duty demands (β‚Ή58+ lakh for Akash Stone), imposed equivalent penalties under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, and held the benefit of exemption notification to be inapplicable.

    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 Mumbai Rejected Revenue Appeals and Upholds SAD Refund

    CESTAT Mumbai Rejected Revenue Appeals and Upholds SAD Refund

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 07.07.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai Rejected Revenue Appeals and Upholds SAD Refund

    Background of the Case

    Ram Ratna Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. imported goods on which they paid 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. These goods were subsequently sold on payment of Value Added Tax (VAT). The company filed two refund applications:

    • β‚Ή12,06,790/- and
    • β‚Ή2,59,343/-

    claiming refund of SAD paid, supported by CA certificates confirming that the burden of duty had not been passed on to the buyer. The original adjudicating authority rejected the refund claims on the ground of unjust enrichment. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund, holding that the company was entitled to it and no unjust enrichment had occurred.

    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 Delhi Sets Aside Penalties on Small Jewellers

    CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside Penalties on Small Jewellers

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 07.07.2025

    CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside Penalties on Small Jewellers

    Background

    The appellantsβ€”small-scale jewellers from Panipat, Haryanaβ€”were caught in a DRI-led raid at a Karol Bagh shop in 2018. Large quantities of gold bars of foreign origin and Indian currency exceeding β‚Ή3 crore were seized. The jewellers were found with cash amounts ranging between β‚Ή3.1 lakhs and β‚Ή9.5 lakhs, allegedly meant to buy gold from a person.

    The Customs Department issued a Show Cause Notice alleging that the appellants were conspirators in the smuggling of foreign-origin gold, proposing confiscation of currency under Section 121 and penalties under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962.

    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