Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(127)ECC1; 2008(153)LC1(SC); 2008(225)ELT3(SC); 2008(4)SCALE417; (2008)5SCC617; 2008AIRSCW2353
..... are not guilty of suppression of facts, collusion or wilful misstatement of facts, therefore, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked under proviso to section 28(1) of the customs act, 1962 in the instant appeal and the other connected appeals. consequently, this appeal and other connected appeals filed by the appellant have to be dismissed being time barred. 42. since this ..... stress on the question of limitation and imposition of penalty therefore, we deem it appropriate to reproduce the provisions (sections 28 and 114a) dealing with limitation and penalty in the customs act, 1962. sections 28 and 114a are reproduced as under:28. notice for payment of duties, interest, etc. - (1) when any duty has not been levied or has been short-levied ..... notification. the matter of dispute is only regarding the quantum of wastage and recovery of gold therefrom and, therefore, section 111(o) of the customs act, 1962 cannot be invoked and, consequently, section 112(a) or 114a of the customs act, 1962 also cannot be invoked. it was further submitted that the show-cause notice is time barred and that since the show-cause notice is ..... it was also submitted on behalf of the respondent that non- accounting of gold or the wastage thereof does not amount to violation of any provisions of the customs act, 1962 or the conditions of customs notification no. 177/94 issued on 21.10.1994. 10. the respondent submitted that the proprietor of the company in his statement informed that the gold is .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2007(3)SC630; 2007(3)SCALE598; (2007)2SCC777
..... bearing on the detention order. concluding his argument, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the preventive detention under cofeposa is distinctly different from the prosecution under the customs act, 1962 and ipc, the sanctity of the detention order issued by the second respondent as the detaining authority, should be upheld and the same should be ordered to be ..... the settlement commission. the settlement commission, while extending the benefits as envisaged in the true spirit of settlement, have granted immunity from fine, penalty and prosecution under the customs act, 1962 and ipc. the final order of the settlement commission has, by no means, undermined the surroundings of the offence committed by the petitioner and his brother. in the admission ..... granted unconditional immunities, the present detention order is contrary to the settled position of law.33. nowhere it is stated in. the provisions of section 127h of the customs act, 1962 and in the order of the settlement commission dated 08.03.2006 that the opportunity of further indulgence in smuggling activities is sealed or plugged. in our view, ..... for the petitioner further submitted that the impugned order of detention is contrary to the spirit of settlement and legislative intent behind the scheme of settlement enacted under the customs act, 1962.i. the settlement commission came into being as a culmination of the report submitted by the wanchoo committee set up for toning up the administration of direct taxes .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1983LC1462D(Kerala); 1983(14)ELT1751(Ker)
..... as follows:'157/78-cus. dt. 9-8-1978g.s.r. 402(e).-in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the central government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do hereby exempts wood pulp falling within chapter 47 of the first schedule to ..... and selective as to quantum of exemption. in respect of additional duty which is levied under customs tariff act the power of exemption is specified under section 3(6) of the customs tariff act. no doubt that provisions would indicate that the provisions in the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and the rules and regulations made thereunder, including those relating to drawbacks, refunds and exemption from ..... duty and surcharge. the first two alone are in point for the present discussion. the customs act, 1962 deals with customs duty proper, which people refer to as the basic duty. the customs act is a permanent code for the customs. it establishes the administrative hierarchy for the management of duties of customs; it lays down the assessment procedure; it contains enforcement provision, such as penalties and ..... . reference need be made only to one of them as the wordings are similar. i will extract from ext. pi.'customs notificationin exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) the central government being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do hereby exempts viscose staple fibre .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2009)6MLJ990
..... not be given beyond three times. sufficient safeguard for expeditious disposal of the appeal is given. thus, it is evident that effective statutory remedy is provided under the customs act, 1962, against the orders passed by the original authority.20. the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner admitted that pursuant to the impugned orders the goods were already ..... issues arise for consideration as preliminary issues:(1) whether the petitioner is entitled to maintain these writ petitions without availing the alternate remedy of filing appeal under the customs act, 1962, on the facts and circumstance of these cases?(2) whether the petitioner can invoke the territorial jurisdiction of this court in challenging the order dated 20.5.2009 ..... imported goods were released, unless the said orders are stayed, the petitioner cannot prevent the further import of similar goods and therefore the appeal remedy provided under the customs act, 1962, is not an effective alternate remedy and the writ petitions are maintainable, though there is an alternate remedy available.13. i have considered the rival submissions made by ..... followed while passing the impugned orders by the authorities concerned, the petitioner is bound to file appeal before the statutory authority as contemplated under the provisions of the customs act, 1962, where the hierarchy of the officers are mentioned to file appeal. on the above said two grounds viz., disputed facts cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2010(112)BomLR2266,2010(176)LC257(Bombay)
..... authority would despite express provision of reference, will invoke writ jurisdiction with impunity.19. in the present case, there was a specific provision under section 130(3) of the customs act, 1962 for filing the reference application in the high court within six months against the order of refusing to refer the questions of law to the high court. the allahabad high ..... the constitution of india challenging the orders dated 17.01.1998 and 15.05.1998 is not maintainable in view of the alternate remedy available to the petitioner under the customs act, 1962. if the reasons given by the petitioner were to be accepted as valid basis for exercising our judicial discretion to entertain this petition on merits under extraordinary jurisdiction under ..... that as the petitioner preferred civil application no. 2379/2005 for allowing them to treat or convert the present petition as reference application under section 130(3) of the customs act, 1962, it shows that the petitioner has abandoned its right to proceed with the writ petition filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india against the orders dated ..... the petitioner already preferred civil application no. 2379/2005 for allowing the petitioner to treat or convert the present writ petition as reference application under section 130(3) of the customs act, 1962. prayer clauses (b), (c) and (d) of the said civil application read as under:(b) in the alternative and without prejudice, this honourable court may be pleased to treat/ .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2010(112)BomLR1776,2010(175)LC159(Bombay)
..... the premises of m/s. rajmal lakhichand, 169, balaji peth, jalgaon, should not be confiscated under section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962, read with section 3(3) of foreign trade (development & regulation) act, 1962, read with section 111 of the customs act, 1962...35(h) without prejudice to above, it has also come on record that shri abdul mohd. kunhi, and shri khalid thekee purayil ..... subpara- (ii) of para34, the recitals reads thus:the silver converted into chaurasas form has also been rendered liable to confiscation under the provisions of section 120 of the customs act, 1962.again reading of the aforesaid para of the show cause notice would show that section 120 was invoked because the smuggled silver was converted into chaurasa form. thus change of ..... is not co-relatable to the baggages receipts. accordingly, the said silver 199.66 kgs. is also liable to confiscation under the provisions of section 111(d) of the customs act, 1962.40. having noticed relevant contents of the show cause notice, let us now turn to the findings relating to confiscation of silver weighing 194.250 kgs. appearing in para11 and ..... purchased from m/s. dilipkumar hirachand & sons, jalgaon'. the modified question, thus, reads as under:whether the tribunal was justified in invoking the provision of section 120(2) of the customs act, 1962 to order confiscation of silver, when the said provisions had not been invoked in the show cause notice and when the applicants were not given any opportunity of being heard .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
..... dubai and to other places. however, the evidence obtained by the respondent, from the accused, during the process of enquiry conducted by him, under the relevant provisions of the customs act, 1962, which had not been obtained by compulsion, could be made use of in the subsequent proceedings, if any, initiated against the petitioner, or against other persons, in the manner ..... give any evidence, which would be self incriminatory in nature. however, it is made clear that the respondent would have the power and authority, under section 108 of the customs act, 1962, to summon the petitioner to produce the necessary documents and other evidence, in relation to the alleged smuggling activities of the other accused persons. it is also made clear ..... and seizure of documents.9. per contra, the learned senior central government standing counsel appearing for the respondent had submitted that the respondent is empowered, under section 108 of the customs act, 1962, to summon any person, whose attendance he considers as necessary, either to give evidence or to produce a document, or any other thing, in any enquiry, which such ..... and other places, along with the other accused persons, against whom the proceedings had been initiated, cannot be asked, by way of a summons, issued under section 108 of the customs act, 1962, to give evidence in connection with the said case. as such, the fundamental right of the petitioner, against self incrimination, has been infringed by the respondent. as such, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
..... made applicable to such goods, which are supplied to the special economic zones, from the domestic tariff areas. further, the definition of export goods , under section 2 (19) of the customs act, 1962, means any goods which are to be taken out of india to a place outside india. as such, it is clear that only in respect of such goods, which are ..... , bearing circular no.29/2006-cus, dated 27.12.2006, had also been issued on the same lines.15. it had also been stated that the customs act, 1962, was in force until the special economic zones act, 2005, was implemented, during the month of march, 2006. consequently, the supplies from the domestic tariff areas, to the units in the special economic zones, or ..... , had levied export duty on the goods transported by the petitioners stating that such transportation would fall under the definition of `export', as defined under section 2(18) of the customs act, 1962.7. the main contention of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that the definition of the term `export under section 2(18) of the ..... customs act, 1962, cannot be made use of by the customs authorities concerned to levy duties of customs, in respect of the productions, which are supplied from the domestic tariff areas to the special economic zones, as such goods are covered .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
..... was being returned, as the imported goods had been re-exported without any process. thereafter, the petitioner had requested for the sanctioning of drawback, under section 74 of the customs act, 1962, vide letter, dated 4.12.2001. the claim made by the petitioner, for drawback, had been rejected by the central excise authorities stating that the goods exported did not ..... -exported without undergoing the usual process of verification, as the shipping bills had been filed by the petitioner, under the drawback scheme, in terms of section 75 of the customs act, 1962, and classified draw back tariff item no.9801 meant for brand rate. it is also noted that the accompanying invoice had the `no objection endorsement given by the assistant ..... and therefore, the application had been returned. consequently, the exporter had requested, vide letter, dated 4.12.2001, for the sanctioning of draw back, under section 74 of the customs act, 1962.12. it had been further stated that the petitioner had imported 17,000 kilograms of metronidazole from china, in two consignments. both the consignments were cleared. subsequent to the clearance ..... firm, in respect of 5,000 kilograms of metronidazole, the petitioner firm has preferred a revision application before the first respondent, as provided under section 129 dd of the customs act, 1962. the department had also filed a revision application against the allowing of the draw back claimed by the appellate authority to the extent of 8,000 kilograms of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
..... petition would amount to interference with the confiscation proceedings and the final adjudication orders. the writ petitioners have raised the plea that as per the above quoted provisions of the customs act, 1962, they are entitled to get back the seized motorcycles without, however, making any prayer for interference with the final adjudication orders dated 20.12.2002. i have gone ..... for. it has already been noticed that the final adjudication orders have been passed on 20.12.2002 and the petitioners have got remedy under the provisions of the customs act, 1962 itself. it will be a wise discretion not to exercise the power under article 226 of the constitution of india so as to interfere with the confiscation proceedings, ..... forwarded to their permanent address in myanmar under registered post to facilitate them to give their defence before the adjudicating authority. this is in compliance of section 153 of the customs act, 1962, which deals with service of notice/order/decision etc. opportunity was also given for personal hearing. however, no response was received. accordingly adjudicating authority disposed of the case ..... the proceedings initiated against the petitioners.9. mr. das, learned senior. counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously argued that as per the provisions of section 110 of the customs act, 1962, it is the mandatory requirement to issue notice in respect of seizure made and in case of non-issuance of notice in respect thereof within 6 months of the seizure .....Tag this Judgment!