Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: customs act 1962 Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat bangalore Page 8 of about 3,849 results (0.085 seconds)

Mar 21 2006 (TRI)

Rajesh Exports Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

..... of the export goods and, therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly held that the export goods are liable for confiscation under section 113(d) and 113(i) of the customs act, 1962. (ii) the customs duty on the gold content of export goods, which have been rendered short by mis-declaration by the petitioners, is being demanded under proviso to section 28(1) of ..... box showed discrepancy. (ix) the requirement of the licence granted was to export jewellary of 22 carat purity. the job workers in their statement given under section 108 of the customs act, 1962 have said that they had manufactured and returned ornaments of 22 carat purity only. this is indicated in para 8 of the show cause notice. (x) the consignments under seizure ..... rs. 1.97 crores are liable for confiscation under section 113(d) and 113(i) of the customs act 1962. as the goods were released provisionally no redemption fine was imposed. he confiscated the goods covered by shipping bill 049574 dated 31.12.97 valued at rs. 57.86 lakhs ..... .60 being the duty foregone in respect of primary gold imported under deec scheme in respect of 4.2193 kgs. of gold found short under section 28(1) of the customs act 1962. penalty under section 114(i) was also proposed. the original authority held that the goods presented for export under the four shipping bills dated 31.12.1997 totally valued at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 2006 (TRI)

Adani Exports Limited and ors. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2007)(210)ELT443Tri(Bang.)

..... bearing on the determination of value under section 14 of the customs act, 1962. (iii) in similar case of import at mumbai, bangalore & goa, the department has accepted the declared value and no appeal has been filed.5 ..... pvt. ltd. the tribunal has held that the above declaration is not relevant for the purpose of determination of value under section 14 of the customs act, 1962. further, the tribunal, in the case of cc v. dimple overseas has held that the export declarations filed by the overseas parties have no ..... 97-cus. we also accept the value declared by the appellants.therefore, the goods are not liable to confiscation under section 111(m) of the customs act. hence, the rf and the penalties under section 114a, 112(a), 112(b) on the appellants are set aside. we allow the appeals.(operative ..... the chairman and managing director of m/s. adani exports ltd. after elaborate investigation, show cause notices were issued to the concerned persons under the customs act. the show cause notices raised the following issues. (i) the correctness of the declaration of the impugned goods as computer software. proposal to classify ..... of the benefit of the same notification vide sl. no. 174 (v) confiscation of the goods under section 111(m) of the customs act.after adjudication, the commissioner passed the impugned order. the gist of the order is as follows: (i) the impugned goods are classified as recorded .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 2008 (TRI)

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Shri Nanda Kumar Somanna, Smt.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2008)(226)ELT266Tri(Bang.)

..... be noted here that eou is a bonded warehouse licenced under section 58 of the customs act 1962 and the eou is permitted to carry out manufacturing operations in the said premises in terms of section 65 of the customs act 1962. therefore a third party carrying out manufacturing activities in the said premises is not ..... goods specified in the loi/lop. the licence under section 58 and the permission to carry out manufacturing operations as per section 65 of the customs act is also for the development and export of software. thus the furniture/work stations being supplied by the m/s. rsa are in the ..... the same are to be treated as goods manufactured by the assessees, though a part of the manufacturing activity took place in the premises of the customers. having observed as above, the commissioner should not have allowed the benefit of the notification. no. 125/84- central excise dt. 26.05. ..... manufactured by the assessee. though, a part of the manufacturing activity took place in the premises of the customers.however, the commissioner allowed the benefit of notification 125/84 dated 26.05.1984 decides allowing ssi exemption and dropped the demand.he did not ..... them do not amount to manufacture. after considering everything, the commissioner gave a finding that the activities carried out by the respondents of their customer premises amounts to manufacture and resultant products are classifiable under chs 9403.00 of ceta 1985 and the same are to be treated as goods .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 1999 (TRI)

Kudremukh Iron Ore Co. Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2000)(89)LC173Tri(Bang.)alore

..... chargeable by reference to their value; the value of such excisable goods shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this act, be determined in accordance with the provisions of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and the customs tariff act, 1975 (51 of 1975). provided that, unless specifically provided in such notification, no exemption therein shall apply to excisable goods which are produced or ..... or manufactured,- (ii) by a hundred per cent export oriented undertaking and allowed to be sold in india, shall be an amount equal to] the aggregate of the duties of customs which would be leviable under section 12 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962), on like goods produced or manufactured outside india if imported into india, and where the said duties of ..... -section (1) of section 25 of the said customs act on the like goods produced or manufactured outside india if imported into india ..... of excise leviable thereon under section 3 of the said central excises and salt act as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate of 50 per cent of each of the duties of customs, which would be leviable under section 12 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) read with any other notification for the time being in force issued under sub .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2001 (TRI)

M/S Essar Gujart Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2001)(76)ECC428

..... includes the port charges thereby establishing the nexus between the two. (ii) no dispute here that the price has to be fixed in terms of sec. 14 of the customs act, 1962 read with customs valuation rules, 1988 as if the subject goods are the ones which have been imported into the country. (iii) as the exporter in a foreign country would include ..... excisable goods shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this act, be determined in accordance with the provisions of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and the customs tariff act, 1975 (51 of 1975)." therefore the value of tariff classification will have to be done as per the provisions of customs act 1962 and the customs tariff act 1975. (b) we find, that the price of imported goods ..... subject goods nor is identical nor similar goods and hence transaction value is not available. the value has to be determined as per sec 14 of the customs act, 1962 read with rule 8 of the customs valuation rules, 1988 by giving due adjustments as per the provisions contained in rule 9 thereof. while arriving at the imported value all the expenses which ..... to their value then, the value of such excisable goods, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of central excises and salt act, 1944, has to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the customs act, 1962 and the customs tariff act, 1975. in view of these clear provisions one cannot bring in the concept of valuation as per the central excise law. ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 01 2002 (TRI)

Mangalore Refinery and Vs. C.C.E., Bangalore

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2002)(141)ELT247Tri(Bang.)

..... of ship's ullage survey report or on the basis of the quantity as per shore-tank receipts. (b) whether the impugned demands raised under section 28(2) of the customs act, 1962 as short-levy is valid and legally sustainable." and the final order does not appear to be based on the supreme court decision on levy of duty and assessment on ..... of entry for the warehoused crude oil, cleared from such bonded warehouse storage tanks are being filed for home consumption and duties are being paid under the provisions of the customs act, 1962. provisional bills of entry showing quantity of crude oil received in the bonded storage tanks (also called as shore tanks) were being filed, which were not accepted by the ..... about the applicability of various decisions on the question that the determination of quantity for the purpose of action under section 116 of customs act, 1962 and the quantity imported for levy of customs duty under section 12 of the said act cannot be different. they have observed that 'whatever the manner and methodology to be adopted to ascertain correctly the quantity of goods imported ..... the determination of the crucial date for rate of duty applicable to any imported goods in terms of the provisions of customs act, 1962. the hon'ble supreme court has, after taking into account the provisions of section 15(1) of the customs act come to the conclusion that: (a) in the case of goods cleared for home consumption, the date of presentation of bill .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 2002 (TRI)

K.T. Kuppiah Vs. Commissioner of Customs,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2002)(142)ELT371Tri(Bang.)

..... sc 1072; 2000 (126) e.l.t. 102 to assist a1 & a2 to shield them from the visit of penalty under section 112(b) of the customs act, 1962, since they had clear concert and concern with the imported car now confiscated. at the most, the penalties could be reduced in quantum as prayed for. ( ..... confiscation and in fact have been confiscated in this case viz. merezedez bez car. he has been correctly found liable for penalty under section 112(b) of the customs act, 1962. (b) as regards the role of the appellant a2 herein, the finding arrived by the commissioner is - ....para 29(g).- "shri rajesh kumar, son ..... hereinafter referred to as a2) appellant in appeal no. c-104/1998 on whom penalty has been imposed under section 112(b)(v) of the customs act, 1962 by the commissioner of customs, bangalore vide order-in-original no. 22/97, dated 3-10-97. as they were found to be concerned with one merezedez bens, model ..... he deposited the foreign remittance draft into the nre account of shri mohammed aliyar, that he also obtained a demand draft in favour of commissioner of customs, bangalore that he in his name withdrew a total cash of rs. 10 lakhs on three occasions from the nro account of shri aliyar, that ..... appellant al is not an innocent broker in imported cars. he is actively involved and concerned with dealing with the imports & clearance of such cars through customs. he is not concerned with mere brokering of sales subsequent to imports as is being made out by the appellant before us. we find, a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 15 2002 (TRI)

Express Kargo Forwarders Pvt. Vs. Commr. of Cus., Bangalore

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2002)(143)ELT128Tri(Bang.)

..... from such principals. in this case, we find no such efforts made. since no such efforts made towards duty due on importers under the provisions of customs act, 1962, we cannot hold the appropriation order to be valid. it is premature, is required to be set aside with consequential relief to the appellants herein, cha ..... individual importers and ordered the appropriation of the balance rs. 1,68,649/- towards the penalty imposed under sections 112 and 114 of the customs act, 1962. (a) there is no contest before us as regards the findings on forgery and the misappropriation of duty amounts as recovered from the importers by ..... i) a penalty of rs. 1,00,000/- on the cha under section 112(a)(ii) and rs. 50,000/- under section 114{iii) of the customs act, 1962. (ii) a sum of rs. 231/351/- appropriated from the deposit of rs. 4 lakhs made by cha against the differential duty demand made on the ..... against the rs. 4 lakhs deposited by them during the enquiry and penalty be imposed on them under sections 112(a) and 114(iii) of the customs act, 1962.3. the present appeal is by the cha, before us, is against the order of the commissioner who after determining and demanding duties from various importers ..... the two employees asking them to show - cause why penalty should not be imposed on them under sections 112(a) and 114(iii) of the customs act, 1962. this notice was also issued to the importers asking why the goods should not be confiscated as they were cleared on such forged bes and they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 2003 (TRI)

Pantex Geebee Fluid Power Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2003)(160)ELT514Tri(Bang.)

..... the non-levy of duty of rs. 90,00,000/- appears to be recoverable under the proviso to section 28 of the customs act, 1962 along with interest under section 28ab of the customs act, 1962. (ix) it was further alleged that due to non-declaration of the value at the time of import of the said goods ..... with an assessable value of rs. 90 lakhs, the said goods (designs and drawings) appear to be liable for confiscation under section 111(m) of the customs act, 1962. (x) it was alleged that the appellants have imported drawings and designs having an assessable value of rs. 90 lakhs without payment of duty of rs. ..... s.c.)] wherein it was held that 'drawings and designs all of tangible movable articles are goods liable for charge of customs duty under section 12 read with section 2(22)(e) of the customs act, 1962, irrespective of what that article may be or may contain' and would be liable for duty; in this case, ..... power ltd. (the noticee) shall be rs. 90 lakhs for the purpose of demand and recovery of customs duty. (ii) customs duty amounting to rs. 90 lakhs is confirmed under the proviso to section 28 of the customs act, 1962. (iii) demand and recovery of interest at 24% per annum as prescribed under notfn. no. 32/2000 ..... ld. commissioner has erred in demanding interest on duty demanded for the period before 28-9-90 under section 28ab of the customs act, 1962 in respect of alleged imports found by him to have been made in 1995. (j) similarly, the mandatory penalty under section 114a of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 2003 (TRI)

Hetero Drugs Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Airport

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2004)(168)ELT211Tri(Bang.)

..... duty, having been conferred with the status of an importer under section 147(3) of the customs act, 1962. (b) the opening portion of section 147(1) of the customs act, 1962 refers to those actions which the customs act requires an importer to do. for instance, section 46 of the customs act, 1962 requires an importer to file a bill of entry for home consumption of the goods or for ..... .(g) a show cause notice was thereafter issued proposing to demand rs. 5,31,42,396/- + rs. 4,78,130/- under section 28(1) of the customs act, 1962 and to impose penalties on the ground. (i) demand of rs. 5,31,42,396/- was sought to be made on the ground that the cash numbers indicated in 68 ..... warehousing in the prescribed form. section 59 of the customs act, 1962 requires the importer to execute a bond in case the goods are to be entered for warehousing, for an amount equal to twice of the duty assessed on the goods ..... these officers is not even whispered in the show cause notice or considered by the commissioner. such large scale breech of customs procedures prescribed under the customs act, 1962 could not have occasioned but for the connivance or/and collusion or/and negligence of customs preventive officers in the discharge of their duties. surely the importer-company at hyderabad cannot be found fault with and .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //