Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: customs act 1962 Court: delhi Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 691 results (0.065 seconds)

Jul 23 1999 (HC)

iron Master (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-23-1999

Reported in : 81(1999)DLT866; 1999(51)DRJ254; 2000(67)ECC376; 2000LC60(Delhi); 1999(114)ELT792(Del)

..... was required but had not been obtained. the goods were, therefore, held to be imported in contravention of law and liable to confiscation under section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962.4. the custom authorities in case of the import covered by cw. no. 2165/99 gave the option to the petitioner to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of rs ..... had been imported in contravention of law and, thereforee, were liable to be confiscated under section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962. the proceedings for confiscation of the goods were initiated in accordance with the statute i.e. section 125(2) of customs act, 1962. petitioner was given an option of payment of redemption fine and penalty in lieu of confiscation. petitioner had challenged the ..... waiver of the complete amount of the redemption fine and penalty imposed in respect of the imported goods. the goods imported had been confiscated under section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962, but an option to pay redemption fine and--penalty in lieu of confiscation, had been provided to the petitioner under section 125 of the said ..... tractor spares and second hand diesel engines from japan. in this case, the deputy commissioner of customs vide his order dated 23rd december, 1997, held the goods to be imported in contravention of law and liable for confiscation under section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962. the petitioner was given an option in lieu of confiscation to pay redemption fine of rs. 24 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1999 (HC)

Tara Singh Vs. Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-05-1999

Reported in : 1999(49)DRJ306

..... .1.1998 passed by respondent no. 1 in revision under section 129dd of the customs act 1962 (for short 'the act') dismissing the petitioner's revision petition and confirming the order dated 23.6.1997 passed by the commissioner of customs (appeals) who had confirmed the order of the additional com-missioner, customs except that the penalty was reduced from rs. one lakh to rs. 50 ..... also katha, with the option to redeem katha on payment of fine of rs. 4,000/-. a penalty of rs. one lakh under section 114 of act was also imposed.6. in appeal the commissioner of customs (appeals) maintained the order of confiscation, and fine however, he reduced the amount of penalty from rs. one lakh to rs. 50,000/-. his revision ..... been falsely implicated and that he was forced/coerced to make involuntary statement under section 108 of the act, and that he had declared to the custom officer that he had imported the currencies and was taking the same back.5. the learned additional commissioner (customs), new delhi rejected the defense plea and ordered confiscation of the indian and the foreign currencies seized ..... petition to the government of india under section 129dd of the act was also rejected vide order dated 27.1.1998.7. learned counsel for the petitioner has .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 1999 (HC)

Vocke Curt Ulrich Vs. Customs Through Air Customs Officers

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-14-1999

Reported in : 1999IVAD(Delhi)313; 80(1999)DLT214; 1999(50)DRJ36; 1999(65)ECC881

..... further submits that the accused has already suffered a personal penalty of rs.one lakh under section 114 of the customs act, 1962. the foreign currency equivalent to rs.7,32,774 has also been confiscated under section 113(d) and 113(h) of customs act, 1962. the accused is in custody since 30th march 1999. thus, he has been in custody for one and a ..... the recovered foreign currency. the total amount of foreign currency in indian currency was valued at rs.7,32,774/-. the accused made a statement under section 108 of the customs act admitting the facts and circumstances of recovery and seizure of foreign currency from his possession. 2. seeing the recovery of more than us$ 5000, it is apparent that the petitioner ..... passport no. 7167142695 7167142695 was found carrying foreign currency. as he proceeded to the security hold area, he was intercepted by a customs officer in plain clothes and was asked whether he was carrying any currency or prohibited goods. the petitioner replied in negative. in presence of the witnesses notice was given to ..... orders.n. kapoor, j.1. heard. according to the prosecution, the petitioner was arrested by the officers of air customs, igi airport, new delhi while he was scheduled to board a swiss air flight dated 30th march 1999 delhi to zurich. the petitioner mr. vocke curt ulrich having a german .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1999 (TRI)

Cc Vs. Satpal Kanojia

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-09-1999

Reported in : (1999)(84)LC220Tri(Delhi)

..... case it is clear that respondent wilfully concealing the goods which are liable to confiscation under section 111. hence is liable to penal action under section 112(b) of the customs act, 1962.he, therefore, submits non mentioning of sub-section 112 in the show cause notice or the adjudication order will not be fatal to the case of the department. for this ..... of cellular phones in colour television and rcr; that he know that he had committed an offence. the statement of kartar singh was also recorded under section 108 of the customs act, 1962. kartar singh inter alia stated that they were four brothers and one sister, that he was the eldest, that he was resident of ludhiana and was a mechanic, that his ..... of chargers, two pieces of battery packs of video camera along with the colour television and rcr in which concealment was made, were seized under section 1 10 of the customs act, 1962, collectively valued at rs. 2,85,000/-, on the reasonable belief that the same had been smuggled into the country in contravention of various restrictions/prohibitions on their import and ..... relation to the goods under seizure has rendered the same liable to confiscation under section 11 l(d) and 111(1) of the customs act, 1962 and has also rendered himself liable to penal action under section 112 of the customs act, 1962 and the goods i.e. colour television and rcr used for concealing the goods under seizure are also rendered liable to confiscation under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 1999 (TRI)

Ms. Reena H. Mirchandani Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-05-1999

..... described in the panchnama. the judicial magistrate took cognizance and recorded a finding that there were sufficient grounds against the accused under ss. 132 and 135(1)(a) of the customs act, 1962 vide order dt. 30th september, 1988. hence the accused ms. reena mirchandani, the assessee, was held guilty of offences punishable under the above sections and she was convincted ..... the judicial magistrate took cognizance and recorded a finding that there were sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused for offence under ss. 132 and 135(1)(a) of the customs act, 1962. by the judgment dt. 30th september, 1988, the accused was held guilty for offences punishable under the above sections and she was convicted accordingly.3. in the meanwhile the ..... 1980 dismissed these appeals. the petitioner has further stated that in the meanwhile, the state of madhya pradesh initiated criminal proceedings under s. 125 r/w s. 111 of the customs act, 1962, and the learned chief judicial magistrate, durg, by his order convicted the petitioner and awarded one year's rigorous imprisonment. thereafter, on 2nd november, 1982, the petitioner filed an ..... central excise, jagpur, dt. 25th december, 1975, there was confiscation of foreign watches from the house of the petitioner and levy of penalty of rs. 2 lakhs under the customs act., 1962. accordingly, the ito issued a notice calling upon the assessee to show cause why the value of the watches seized from his residence should not be treated as his income .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 1999 (TRI)

Yuil Measures India Ltd. Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Jun-18-1999

Reported in : (2000)(88)LC411Tri(Delhi)

..... the notification of the govt. of india, min. of finance (deptt. of revenue) no. 339/85-cus dt. 21.11.1985 issued under sub-section 1 section 25 of the customs act, 1962 (52/62). we also note that under notification no. 27/97-cus (nt) dt. 7.7.1997 as amended by notification no. 40/97-cus(nt) dt. 10.9.1997 ..... the benefits of above mentioned notifications but failed to meet the conditions imposed in the said notifications and rules and thereby contravening the provisions of section 111(o) of the customs act, 1962 and rule 173q(d) of the central excise rules, 1944. the appellants were directed by the asstt.commissioner on 7.6.1996 followed by reminder on 24.6.1996 to ..... findings of the board of approval and conditions of the exemption notification are examined together, it becomes very clear that customs duty becomes demandable from the appellant unit and therefore, customs duty has correctly been demanded in terms of section 15 of customs act, 1962 read with instructions issued on the subject.goods have rightly been confiscated and we hold accordingly.18. but for the ..... rule 173q of the central excise rules, 1944 and penalties have been imposed without indicating the section of the customs act, 1962 and specific provision of central excise law. it was contended that though the commissioner of customs, delhi had jurisdiction over noida export processing zone, similar jurisdiction has not been given to the commissioner of central excise, delhi. we have examined this issue .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1999 (TRI)

Sai Enterprises Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-03-1999

Reported in : (1999)(83)LC319Tri(Delhi)

..... who had inter alia mis-declared the exported goods thereby rendering the goods liable to confiscation and he is liable to penalty under section 114 of the customs act, 1962. in the circumstances, we uphold the impugned order but however, reduce the penalty to rs. 7 lakhs on a totality of the facts and circumstances ..... provisions of law for the time being in force namely section 18(1)(a) fera read with section 11a (sic) and section 50(2) of the customs act, 1962. we therefore, uphold the confiscation of the goods.8. penalty has been imposed on shri m.l. chandra, prop, of m/s sai enterprises on ..... not liable to confiscation under section 113(d) as they are not prohibited goods, is not tenable-one of the requirements of export under the customs act, 1962 is compliance with the provisions of section 50 which casts an obligation on an exporter to subscribe to the declaration on the presentation of a shipping ..... export value of the goods.any violation of section 18(1)(a), is deemed to be a violation of the restriction under section 11a of the customs act, 1962, under section 67 of the fera.5. hence the department issued a show cause notice to m/s sai enterprises for gross over-valuation of the ..... and value of export goods, resulting in contravention of section 18(1)(a) read with section 67 of the foreign exchange regulation act, 1973, read with section 11 of the customs act, 1962.2. the brief facts of the case are that the appellants had sought to export l,20,000/-bottles of nail polish (15 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1999 (TRI)

Satpal Manchanda and ors. Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-16-1999

Reported in : (1999)(85)LC1015Tri(Delhi)

..... . one scooter ddr-8682 found parked inside the house along with some documents kept in the scooter were also seized as being relevant to enquiry under the customs act, 1962.3. in the follow up action house no. d-39, greater kailash enclave ii, new delhi of rajpal manchanda was searched on 15.10.1988. a sum of rs. 40 ..... produce any document to show legal possession/import of the recovered gold, the same was, therefore, seized in the reasonable belief that it was liable to confiscation under the customs act, 1962 and gold (control) act, 1968 along with the maruti car. a sum of rs. 65,000/- was also recovered from the house which was also seized as being relevant to the enquiry ..... as also against confiscation of the maruti car and scooter as also against absolute confiscation of seized indian currency of rs. 1,05,000/- under section 121 of the customs act, 1962. as all the above eight appeals arises out of the same order, therefore, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. the facts ..... not be confiscated, the maruti car and the two scooters involved in smuggling should not be confiscated why penalty should not be imposed under section 112 of customs act, 1962 and section 74 of the gold control act, 1968. before the authorities below the appellants contended that the statements of rajpal manchanda, pawan kumar and bhagwat singh choudhary on which the entire case was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 1999 (TRI)

Montana Valves and Compressors Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Oct-29-1999

Reported in : (2000)(116)ELT220TriDel

..... neither dictated by the commissioner nor prepared at his instance and merely kept in his office file be treated to be a valid scn under section 28 of the customs act, 1962. even when the unsigned scns which is actually served on the noticee itself did not carry initial of the commissioner. on the contrary it showed therein certain details ..... ,73,68,386 2,18,33,681__________________________________________________________________________ ld. commissioner after considering the various submissions made before him ordered as under: (a) i determine under section 28(2) of the customs act,1962 the amount of duty as payable, as shown against each importer: 1. mvc - rs. 56,38,734/- (rupees fifty six lakhs thirty eight thousand seven hundred and thirty ..... were, therefore, asked to show cause as to why duty should not be demanded on the goods cleared as above under proviso to section 28(1) of the customs act, 1962 by invoking the extended period of five years and why penalty should not be imposed. the appellants deposited the sums as under :__________________________________________________________________________s.no name of the total cif ..... from indian navy; that the documents were fabricated showing supply to naval dockyard stores, indian navy whereas in fact these goods were diverted in contravention of section 90 of customs act, 1962 to m/s. steel authority of india ltd., bokaro; that 536 numbers of torrington bearing system were supplied to m/s. steel authority of india ltd., bokaro; .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 11 1999 (TRI)

Mvt International Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-11-1999

Reported in : (2000)LC524Tri(Delhi)

..... value is an offence under section 18(1)(a) of fera. he submits that by virtue of section 67 of fera it becomes an offence under section 11 of the customs act, 1962. he submits that since there was misdeclaration in regard to value in terms of section 18(1)(a) of fera, therefore, the goods become liable to confiscation under section 113 ..... export value is mentioned, export cannot be stopped. he submits that there is no other misdeclaration and therefore, the goods cannot be confiscated. ld.consultant submits that section 113 of customs act, 1962 provides for confiscation of goods attempted to be improperly exported; that section 113(d) provides that any goods attempted to be exported or brought within the limits of any ..... -section (1) of section 18 and clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 19 shall be deemed to have been imposed under section 11 of the customs act, 1962 and all the provisions of that act shall have effect accordingly" 4. ld. consultant therefore, submitted that since section 67 of fera provides the restriction imposed by section 18(1)(a) of fera be ..... sought to be exported have become prohibited goods in terms of fera, which prohibition is deemed have been imposed under customs act, 1962. thus goods are liable to confiscation under section 113(d) of customs act and unit liable to action under section 114(1) of customs act, 1962. i have carefully considered the facts. there is certainly a contravention of provisions of section 113(d) as the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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