GST Course
CA Final Online Classes
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

If goods are exempted from Basic Customs Duty, does proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for recovery of duty valid?

LinkedIn


Court :
Supreme Court of India

Brief :
This batch of statutory appeals (being Civil AppealNos. 1827/2018, 1875/2018, 1832/2018 and 3213/2018) under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 arises from acommon final order of the Central Excise and Service TaxAppellate Tribunal (‘CESTAT’) dated 19th December 2017 (‘impugned order’).

Citation :
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1827 OF 2018

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1827 OF 2018

M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED …. APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS …. RESPONDENT(S)

WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1875 OF 2018
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1832 OF 2018
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO.3213 OF 2018

J U D G M E N T

S.A. BOBDE, CJI.

1. This batch of statutory appeals (being Civil AppealNos. 1827/2018, 1875/2018, 1832/2018 and 3213/2018) under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 arises from acommon final order of the Central Excise and Service TaxAppellate Tribunal (‘CESTAT’) dated 19th December 2017 (‘impugned order’).

2. Vide the impugned order an exemption of basiccustoms duty accorded to the Digital Still Image Video Cameras (‘DSIC’) imported by the Nikon India Pvt. Ltd,Canon India Pvt. Ltd., Sony India Pvt. Ltd. and SamsungIndia Electronics Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter referred to as ‘appellants’ or ‘importers’), in terms of exemption Notification No. 20/2005 dated 01.03.2005 (as amended by Notification No. 15/2012 dated 17.03.2012) came to be denied and the consequential confiscation of goods,demand of interest and imposition of penalty as provided for under various sections of the Customs Act, 1962, was upheld by the CESTAT.

3. Since the appeals involve common questions, these are being decided together and for sake of convenience weshall be referring to the events which took place in the case of Nikon.

4. The main issue is whether after clearance of the cameras on the basis that they were exempted from levy ofbasic Customs duty under Notification No.15/2012, theproceedings initiated by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence for recovery of duty not paid under Section28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 are valid in law.

To know more in details find the attachment file

 

Guest
on 17 March 2021
Published in LAW
Views : 33
downloaded 7 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags