Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: customs act 1962 Court: delhi Page 11 of about 49,565 results (0.123 seconds)

May 29 2006 (HC)

Ajay Bajaj Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 131(2006)DLT531; 2006(89)DRJ457; 2007(207)ELT50(Del)

..... under section 439 of the criminal procedure code, 1973. the petitioner has been in custody since 05.05.2006 on the allegation of having committed offences under sections 132/135 of the customs act, 1962. the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out straightway that an application for bail had been moved before the sessions court and by an order dated 22.05.2006, the ..... for bail was maintainable. he further submitted that, however, to demonstrate his bona fides in the matter, he is willing to make a deposit of rs.25 lakhs with the customs authorities without prejudice to his rights and contentions.2. the learned asg was also heard. he opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner is involved in ..... deposit of the said sum of rs.25 lakhs shall be made without prejudice to the petitioner's rights and contentions. this deposit will be made with the commissioner of customs (import), nhava sheva, mumbai in the following manner:-a) a sum of rs.10 lakhs shall be deposited within one week of this order; andb) the balance amount of rs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 2009 (HC)

Microsoft Corporation (India) Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : (2009)227CTR(Del)209; 2009[16]STR545; [2009]23STT400; (2010)27VST497(Delhi)

..... to move out of india to a place out side india following well tested meaning of the term 'export' under section 2(18) of the customs act, 1962. such a view is also very clear when object of article 2.1, 2.2.1, 2.2.3, 2.3, 3.1, ..... v. state of punjab : air 1966 punjab 532. suffice it to observe that while disposing of an application under section 129 of the customs act, 1962 the tribunal is obliged to adhere to the question of undue hardship. the order of the tribunal should show if the pleas raised before ..... 3.2.1 subsidiary shall not solicit orders or agreements from outside the territory. in soliciting orders, subsidiary shall only be authorized to inform customers of price, payment, delivery and other terms offered by mo in accordance with information received from mo or its affiliates, as appropriate. unless ..... the principal was not the beneficiary. a service provider acting directly or indirectly through its agent is not the beneficiary of service so provided while providing of service is its contractual obligation under terms of contract with clients/customers. therefore in the present case of the appellant no service ..... act, 1994 mandates conditional right to appeal having regard to securing interest of revenue and undue hardship. undue hardship has not even been pleaded. therefore, the interim order of stay does not warrant interference in exercise of discretionary writ jurisdiction of this court. he referred to the judgment in the case of vijay prakash mehta v. collector of customs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 12 2006 (HC)

Erica Enterprises and anr. Vs. the Asstt. Collector of Customs (Refund ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 134(2006)DLT225; 2006(92)DRJ346; 2006(112)ECC164; 2006LC164(Delhi); 2007(207)ELT55(Del)

..... demand proof from the petitioner for having not passed on the burden of customs duty in order to be entitled for the refund. however, during the pendency of the writ petition the customs act, 1962 was amended by the excise and customs laws (amendment) act, 1991. as per the amended section 27(1) the application for ..... dated 27.11.1991 rejecting the petitioner's application for refund. in the light of the above findings of fact by the assistant collector of customs and in the absence of any material produced by the petitioner to show to the contrary, it is clear that the petitioner has failed ..... challenge this order where it is asserted that 'the petitioner has placed each and every material for the satisfaction of the learned assistant collector of customs which he has failed to consider.' the petitioner relies on the minutes of the personal hearing before the collector on 12.11.1991 which records ..... no evidence had been produced by the petitioner to confirm that the duty burden had not been passed to the consumers/buyers. accordingly the assistant collector customs (refund) directed the refund amount to be deposited in the consumer welfare fund. 4. thereafter, the petitioner filed cm no. 1310/1992 in ..... to produce the evidence contemplated under section 27(1) of the act read with section 27(2) thereof. thereforee, no fault can be found in the order dated 27.11.1991 of the assistant collector of customs.8. for these reasons, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 2006 (HC)

Director of Agricultrure Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 136(2007)DLT408; 2006(92)DRJ604; 2006(112)ECC207; 2006LC207(Delhi); 2006(204)ELT365(Del)

..... s. muralidhar, j.1. this is an application for condensation of delay of 736 days in filing the present application under section 130a of the customs act, 1962('act') against the impugned order dated 19.9.2001 passed by the customs excise & gold(control) appellate tribunal ('cegat') in appeal no. c/530/93-b.2. in explaining the reasons for the inordinate delay, it is stated ..... it is necessary to bear in mind the fact that the fixation of the quantum of the redemption is in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction of the authorities under the customs act and ordinarily the court, while exercising jurisdiction either under article 32 or under article 136 of the constitution would be slow to interfere with such an order unless it is ..... has been filed under section 130a of the act praying that the high court may direct the appellate tribunal to refer the question of law in para 8 ..... appeal initially filed.3. from the reply to the application filed by the collector of customs, it appears that since the applicant is aggrieved only by imposition of redemption fine and the issue is not one concerning classification or valuation, the appeal under section 130 of the customs act was indeed not maintainable. it is on account of this that the present application .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 2006 (HC)

J.K. Synthetics Limited and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 138(2007)DLT660; 2006(204)ELT369(Del)

..... separate independent statutes. merely because the incidence of tax under section 3 of the customs tariff act, 1975 arises on the import of the articles into india it ..... a duty of customs chargeable under section 12 of the customs act, 1962;(b) the duty in question, namely, under section 3(1) of the customs tariff act;(c) additional duty levied on raw materials, components and ingredients under section 3(3) of the customs tariff act; and (d) duty chargeable under section 9a of the customs tariff act, 1975.the customs act, 1962 and the customs tariff act, 1975 are two ..... 102 cus dated 1.7.1977 the central government, in exercise of its powers under section 25 of the customs act, 1962 ('act'), exempted dmt when imported into india from customs duty in excess of 100% ad valorem. in effect, the rate of customs duty payable on imported dmt was 100%. as regards caprolactum, notification no.86 cus dated 23.4.1980 ..... 2 which states that the rates at which duties of customs are to be levied under the customs act, 1962 are those which are specified in the first and second schedules of the customs tariff act, 1975. in section 12 of the customs act there is no reference to any specific provision of the customs tariff act, 1975. in other words for the purpose of determining .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2006 (HC)

Shri Vikram Singh Vs. Commissioner of Customs and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 137(2007)DLT36; 2006(92)DRJ759; 2007(207)ELT373(Del)

..... vipin sanghi, j.1. this is an appeal under section 130 of the customs act, 1962 (for short `the act') directed against the final order bearing no. 818-829/05-cus, dated 9-13th may, 2005 passed by the customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal, new delhi (hereinafter referred to as `the tribunal) in ..... also challenged the validity of the show cause notice on the ground that the same does not indicate the relevant clause of section 112 of the customs act, under which the penalty was proposed to be imposed therein. we have already dealt with this aspect in the appeal filed by balwan sharma ..... appellant that the tribunal had imposed the penalty without referring to the provisions of section 112(b) of the act. the penalty has been imposed by the commissioner of customs after understanding the facts in detail and by applying the law and the tribunal has simply affirmed that order by ..... attached to sh. harish kumar. further, no reply to the show cause issued by the respondent was received from the appellant. the commissioner of customs has noticed and rightly so that the appellant herein stated to be the bodyguard of shri harish kumar (the kingpin of this racket), directly ..... dismissing the appellant's first appeal.12. in view of the aforesaid, in our opinion, the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law for our consideration under section 130 of the act .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 1976 (HC)

Kelpunj Enterprises Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : ILR1977Delhi198

..... make it 'too soft' for use in the manufacture of saw blades. the result was that he ordered the goods to be confiscated, but acting under section 125 of the customs act, 1962 gave an option to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation. the fines imposed were rs. 1,01,000 for one consignment, and rs. ..... petitioner to show cause why the goods should not be confiscated under section 111 clauses (d) and (m) of the customs act 1962, and a penalty should not be imposed under section 112 of that act. it was said in the notices that the goods 'have been found on test to be stainless alloy steel sheets' and ..... 69,100 for the other. (9) sometime afterwards the customs duty as assessed by the collector. and the fines imposed by him in lieu of confiscation, ..... supplier in this case had in his invoice described the goods as 'alloy steel'. in any case, it was submitted, proceedings under the customs act were of a quasi-criminal nature as they were capable of resulting in confiscation of goods or imposition of penalties, and the burden was on the ..... the orders now impugned, whilst dealing with this latter question reference has been made to the items in the first schedule of the tariff act relied upon by each side for determining customs duty. even before me those items were referred ' to as some kind of aids for construing the license. to my mind, they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1998 (HC)

Medisource Agenices Pvt Ltd and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1998VIAD(Delhi)37; 1998(47)DRJ563

..... orderr.c. lahoti, j. 1. proceedings under the customs act, 1962 with a view to passing an order of adjudication in the matter of likely evasion of payment of customs duty have been initiated against the petitioners. the proceedings are at the stage of investigation. the petitioners have approached this court seeking quashing of the proceedings complaining of the initiation ..... is not a case where it may be said that assuming all the allegations against the petitioners to be true, still no case of breach of the provisions of the customs act can be said to have been made out. it cannot also be said that the official conducting the investigation against the petitioners do not have jurisdiction to investi-gate. there ..... reach a conclusion that a case for proceeding against the petitioners was made out; iii) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of customs act or any other act, the applicability whereof is attracted to the initiation, continuance of the proceedings or institution of any proceedings at the conclusion of the investigation; iv) where the proceedings are ..... others decided cases of the supreme court which are not otherwise directly applicable to the facts of the case. in our opinion, an investigation commenced under the provisions of the customs act may be liable to be interfered with, quashed or set aside only in the following conditions and keeping in view the following principles : (1) the primary consideration before the court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1983 (HC)

Ram Goyal Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1984CriLJ1048; 24(1983)DLT83

..... the baggage of sita ram jodhani. (4) the petitioners were then arrested. on that very day complaint was filed by the customs authorities, after obtaining the sanction of the collector of customs for prosecution under section 135 of the customs act, 1962. the petitioners were produced before the additional chief metropolitan magistrate, new delhi and they were remanded to judicial custody. (5) thereafter ..... taken into consideration by the administrator it is possible that he might have come to the conclusion that no case had been made out for taking action under the cofeposa act. similarly, the pro-charge evidence should also have been placed before the administrator. on going through the pre-charge evidence he could, possibly, have come to the ..... not considered by the detaining authority it would vitiate its subjective satisfaction rendering the detention order illegal. after all the detaining authority must exercise due care and caution and act fairly and justly in exercising the power -of detention and if taking into account matters extraneous to the scope and purpose of the statute vitiates the subjective satisfaction and ..... 1982crilj150 and mrs. saraswati seshagiri v. state of kerala and another, : air1982sc1165 , that prosecution is not relevant to the passing of an order under section 3 of the gafeposa act. he submitted that as the pendency of prosecution was not relevant, thereforee, it must follow that the pre-charge evidence, which was recorded, which is a follow up action of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 2001 (HC)

Sh. Krishan Madan and Another Vs. Deptt. of Customs

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2001VAD(Delhi)252; 92(2001)DLT129; 2001(59)DRJ476; 2001(76)ECC136; 2002(140)ELT52(Del)

..... c.j.1. this is an application under section 130-a of the customs act, 1962 (in short `act'). the application relates to order in misc. case no.m/181/99-mb(db) in appeal no.c/609/93-nb, decided by the north bench of the custom, excise & gold (control) appellate tribunal (in short 'tribunal') on ..... application was filed before the tribunal seeking reference of certain question, stated to be questions of law. the same was dismissed.the court was moved in customs act case no. 1 of 1996.by order dated 2nd september 1996, it was observed that out of the four questions proposed, no question of law ..... .we also find that this tribunal in the case of padigal sriramula held that presumption under section 123 of the customs act is not applicable when the seizure made not by the customs officer but by the police. in the instant case foreign origin of the confiscated goods was indicated by naveen sahni ..... order passed by it under sub-section (1) and shall make such amendments if the mistake is brought to its notice by the commissioner of customs or the other party to appeal: provided that an amendment which has the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or otherwise increasing the ..... the same was a new question which cannot be raised for the first time. thereafter an application was filed under section 129b(2) of the act before the tribunal seeking rectification of certain purported mistakes in the order of the tribunal. by impugned order. tribunal held that there was no mistake .....

Tag this Judgment!


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