Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2004IAD(Delhi)122; 108(2003)DLT31; 2004(91)ECC245; 2004(166)ELT160(Del)
..... amount should compensate the former. on these principles, the court allowed the petitioner interest @ 12% per annum on the principle amount refunded.5. it is to be noted that the customs act, 1962 has been amended and w.e.f. 26.05.1995, inter alia, section 27a was inserted which specifically provided for interest on delayed refunds. it is clear that even prior ..... placed reliance on three decisions of various high courts in support of this plea. he firstly relied upon the decision in the case of calcutta paper mills manufacturing co. v. customs, excise and gold (control) & ors. , reported in 1986 (25) elt (calcutta) 939. in that case in paragraph 17, it was observed as under:-'it is not disputed that the petitioner ..... whereby the refund claim was found to be time barred. the collector appeals, in appeal preferred against the order in original, upheld the order of the asstt. collector. however, the customs, excise and gold (control) appellate tribunal, new delhi by a judgment and/or order dated 08.04.1992 allowed the appeal of the petitioner and set aside the impugned order ..... refunded to it in 1994.2. the petitioner imported kitchen equipment. it so happened that the imported goods were lost while in the possession of the customs authorities. later on, after about four months, the goods were traced out but were found to be in a damaged condition. as such, the petitioner paid duty under under protest. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 123(2005)DLT602; 2005(84)DRJ280; 2006(194)ELT22(Del)
..... 132 of the customs act, 1962. he submits that the reading of the appeal memo clearly indicates that the judgment dated 28th may, 2003, as a whole had been challenged and not piecemeal convictions therein. 3 ..... learned acmm vide judgment dated 28th may, 2003 and order on sentence dated 31st may, 2003 holding the petitioner guilty under section 135(1)(a) and section 132 of the customs act, 1962 2. it is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the appellate court has wrongly come to the conclusion that the appeal memo did not challenge the conviction under section ..... was incorrect for the appellate court to note merely on the basis of the cause title that the challenge is only to conviction under section 135(1)(a) of the customs act and not to that under section 132 thereof. in that view of the matter, i set aside that part of the order under challenge. further, taking into consideration the totality ..... the respondent on the other hand vehemently opposes this prayer. he submits that the petitioner be taught a lesson and that the society must know that any aberration of the customs act would not be dealt with lightly and that a message should go to the society loud and clear that any leniency shown in this respect would cause great injustice to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 123(2005)DLT613; 2005(84)DRJ249; 2006(194)ELT146(Del)
..... order. mr. mukul rohtagi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, has relied on section 113(d) of the customs act, 1962 as a foundation of the argument that the actions of the customs authority need not be circumscribed by the customs act alone and confiscation of goods admitted to be improperly exported can also be predicted on the infraction of any other law ..... duly exported and it is not controverter that valuable foreign exchange has already come into country. the very fact that the consignment was permitted to be exported by the customs department at least leads to the position that the authorities/department concerned construed the notifications in the manner understood by the petitioners. the only conclusion which can be arrived ..... the decision pertaining the confiscation of the goods on the grounds of over-valuation. nothing more can be extracted from the dismissal of the special leave petition filed by the customs department.2. the additional director general of foreign trade in its detailed order has opined that the question which had arisen in those proceedings were altogether different. unfortunately, ..... for the time being in force. it is, thereforee, an idle argument that the directorate of foreign trade is not at all concerned with the actions of the customs department. the conundrum that has .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2004(72)DRJ768; 2004(93)ECC175; 2004(175)ELT61(Del)
..... in this writ petition is to the final order dated 7 august 2002 passed by the customs and central excise settlement commission (for short the `commission') under section 127c(7) of the customs act, 1962, (for short the 'act').3. the petitioner, a company incorporated under the companies act, 1956 is engaged in the manufacture of wall clocks, table clocks and quartz movements for ..... clocks. for the manufacture of the said goods, falling under chapter 91 of the central excise tariff act, 1985, the petitioner has been importing from ..... of mis-classification or otherwise of goods.19. the term 'case' has been defined in clause (a) of section 127a of the act, to mean any proceeding under the act for the levy, assessment and collection of customs duty, or any proceeding by way of appeal or revision in connection with such levy, assessment or collection, which may be pending before ..... not covered by the application, but referred to in the report of the commissioner of customs or the commissioner (investigation)', in accordance with the provisions of the act. in other words, the commission is not only required to act in accordance with the provisions of the act, its jurisdiction is also confined to the matters covered by the application before it. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 95(2002)DLT440; 2002(61)DRJ386; 2002(146)ELT537(Del)
..... manufacture of medicine. a detailed panchnama was drawn on 6.11.2000 and a statement was made by the petitioner under section 108 of the customs act, 1962. the details obtained from the immigration authorities showed that the petitioner had gone abroad six times from 19.8.2000 to 24.10.2000. ..... of various persons were recorded in pursuance to summons issued under section 108 of the customs act and a complaint dated 3.1.2001 for offences punishable under section 132 and 135(1a) of the customs act, 1962 was filed against the petitioner in the court of acmm, new delhi. a reference is ..... made in the statement in the grounds of detention to the fact that the petitioner was earlier detained under the detention order dated 14.1.91 and detention order dated 2.2.94 both under section 3(1) of the act ..... in the present case.14. the issue whether grounds are severable and can be relied upon within the meaning of section 5a of the act would not arise for consideration in view of our conclusion that there is no reliance on the earlier detention orders for arriving at the ..... act). the lt. governor has directed that the petitioner be detained and kept in custody with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods in future.2. the grounds of detention dated 1.2.2001 referred to the incident of 4.11.2000 when the petitioner arrived from hongkong via singapore and proceeded to the exit gate of the customs .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2006(113)ECC60; 2006LC60(Delhi); 2006(207)ELT52(Del)
..... which was rejected by the appellate collector by an order dated 26.11.1980. thereafter the petitioner preferred a revision application before the central government under section 131 of the customs act, 1962 ('act'). by the impugned order dated 20.1.1981, the central government extended the benefit of the rules to certain further articles but denied the benefit to nine items listed at ..... her transfer to india and that in terms of the transfer of residence rules, 1978 ('rules') she should be permitted to import these goods without payment of customs duty.4. the assistant collector customs by his order dated 1.11.1980 allowed certain articles the benefit of the rules on the ground that they were 'found to be not altogether bereft of ..... the government of india, ministry of finance, department of revenue, as modified by subsequent order dated 16.2.1981, in a customs revision application filed by the petitioner to the extent it rejects her plea for exemption from payment of customs duty on 9 items of goods under the transfer of residence rules, 1978.2. rule was issued in this petition at .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 110(2004)DLT95; 2004(73)DRJ278; 2004(93)ECC607; 2004(168)ELT442(Del)
..... view of this, it was considered that the claim was made after the expiry of the time limit of six months prescribed in section 27(4) of the customs act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), and, the claim was rejected as being time barred. the petitioner failed at all stages and hence the writ petition.4. it is the contention of the ..... from united kingdom. the petitioner was anticipating delivery of 69 bales of paper. however, only 51 bales were delivered to the petitioner. thereafter, the petitioner approached the authority under the customs act for issuance of 'short landing certificate', which was issued to the petitioner only on 11.6.1974. it is on the strength of this certificate that the petitioner submitted an ..... placed an order did not arrive in toto and only 51 bales crossed the customs barriers. thereforee, no question of any custom levy arises in so far as 18 bales are concerned. for these 18 bales, the petitioner's case does not come within the four corners of the customs act at all, as no import has taken place for 18 bales for which ..... amount was paid in advance on the assumption that goods will be received. as no import actually took place, the customs authorities cannot refuse refund of the money paid by the petitioner in so far .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1993CriLJ950; 46(1992)DLT443; 1992(22)DRJ313
..... court in balraj singh v. delhi administration, (1986) 29 delhi lt 106. in this case, the appellant was convicted for smuggling under sections 132 and 135(i)(a) of the customs act, 1962 and sentence to rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous ..... order1. a revision petition was filed before this court against the order passed by the additional sessions judge dated 12th november, 1991, under ss. 132/135(1)(a) of the customs act. by this order, the learned additional sessions judge has affirmed the order of the learned a.c.m.m. by which he convicted the accused for the aforesaid offences and ..... of payment of fine, to suffer six months rigorous imprisonment on each of the charges under section 135(ia)(i) and 135(ib)(i) of the customs act and section 5 of the imports and exports (control) act, 1947. the division bench of the bombay high court confirmed the sentence on the accused but penalty of fine was enhanced to rs. 1 lakhs ..... are placed reliance on the judgment of the division bench of the bombay high court in the case of assistant collector of customs v. mudami parthasarthy narayan, 1989 (44) exc l ts 437. in this case, the assistant collector of customs had filed an appeal for enhancement of sentence. the assistant collector made grievance that the court ought not to have taken .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2001IIIAD(Delhi)141; 2001RLR294
..... facts and circumstances of the case, the assessed is entitled to deduction of the payment of rs.50,000/- made u/s 11 of the customs act, 1962?' 5. tribunal recorded a finding of fact that though assessed had failed to substantiate its explanationn but, certainly, its explanationn was bona fide. reference ..... the korean company that finished goods were supplied to the assessed company due to mistake in their computer. it is evident from record that after customs authorities noticed about form of the cassettes, assessed took up the matter with the korean company. it was clarified by the korean company that ..... along with the bill of entry which indicated the words 'video blank cassettes tape in s.k.d. when the goods reached india, customs authorities raised some doubts and accordingly they opened one of the packets. on opening it was noticed by the authorities that though the bill ..... assessing officer held that as this payment was on account of breach of statutory rules relating to customs duty and, thereforee, was not allowable. he also initiated penal proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the act. against the disallowance assessed preferred appeal before the commissioner of income-tax [appeals] (in short ..... cause as to why penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the act should not be imposed. assessed furnished its reply. its stand was that disallowance was made only on the basis of order of the collector of customs bombay. neither the assessing officer nor the tribunal had adjudicated the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1984(16)ELT113(Del)
..... was rejected by the respondent by impugned letter of 12-4-1978. it was thereafter that the present writ petition has been filed. 4. under section 12(1) of the customs act, 1962, customs shall be levied at such rates on goods imported into or exported out of india. in order however, to encourage export power is given under section 25 of the ..... . i am called upon to find whether the impugned order suffers from any illegality. 15. scheme of the legal provisions to receive drawback is as under :- chapter x of the customs act, 1962 deals with drawback. section 75 is the relevant provision. it provides :- '75. (1) where it appears to the central govt. that in respect of goods of any class or description ..... , 1971. relevant rules are 3, 4, 6(1)(a) and 7 which read :- '3. drawback : (1) subject to the provisions of - (a) the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and the rules made there under, (b) the central excises and salt act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and rules made there under, and (c) these rules a drawback may be allowed on the export of goods ..... duty paid has been rebated or refunded in whole or in part or given as credit under any of the provisions of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962), and the rules made there under or of the central excises and salt act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and the rules made there under, the drawback admissible on the said goods shall be reduced taking into .....Tag this Judgment!