Custom Judgements

The brief facts which give rise to the aforesaid issue are that the Respondent imported Crude Palm Stearin through Kakinada Port and filed Bills of Entry declaring the goods as industrial grade Crude Palm Stearin falling under Ch. Sub Heading No. 15

Challenge in this appeal, by the revenue, under Section 130E(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short “the Act”) is to the order dated 10th December 2004 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, (for short “the Tribunal”) where

This civil appeal under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short “the Act”) is directed against order dated 2nd February 2005, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby the appeal pre

Penalty on customs officers - . The order passed by , Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), to the extent he decided not to impose any penalty on the petitioners, could not have been set aside and the matter could not have been remanded back to the

Customs - Refund of differential duty paid on import of vessel subject to principles of unjust enrichment - Duty recoverable from Customs should be shown as current assets,

Whether the principle of Unjust Enrichment applies to the claim for refund of custom duty paid on imported capital goods.

Whether imported inputs damaged during transit can be considered as used for the manufacture of specified goods.

Procedural lapse — Forfeiture of Special Imprest Licence (SIL) — Exemption — Appellant applied to the Joint Chief Controller of Imports & Exports for issuance of an import licence with duty exemption entitlement certificate to avail of Customs Duty e

valuation -Merely because supplier was holding 30% of equity in share capital of buyer does not establish mutuality of interest - Burden to prove undervaluation lies on Revenue