Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: customs act 1962 Year: 1979 Page 1 of about 981 results (0.098 seconds)

Nov 14 1979 (HC)

H. Jahangir Bhatusha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-14-1979

Reported in : 1984(15)ELT106(Del)

..... having regard to the circumstances of exceptional nature as mentioned above and in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 25 of the customs act, 1962 (52 of 1962) read with subsection (4) of clause 31 of the finance bill, 1979, which clause has by virtue of the declaration made in the said bill ..... v.s. deshpande, c.j.1. under section 25 of the customs act, 1962 (the act)-'(1) if the central government is satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, it may, by notification in the ..... understand the powers exercised by the central government from time to time under section 25(1) and section 25(2) of the customs act in regard to the customs duty payable on these commodities. the customs tariff act, 1975, schedule i, section 1, entry 15.07 imposed a duty on these commodities at 60% on the value of the ..... goods to be imported. on 1st july, 1977, however, the government ordered under section 25(1) of the customs act, a total exemption of these commodities from the payment of customs duty on imports. thus for some time these commodities were imported totally without payment of duty. the reason was obvious. for some ..... % ad valorem. at the time of the admission of the writ petitions reference was made to section 12 of the customs act to show that no discrimination would be made in the imposition of customs duty between the goods belonging to the government and the goods belonging to others. an interim injunction was also secured directing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1979 (HC)

Union of India and ors. Vs. Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-15-1979

Reported in : 1980CENCUS203D; 1984(17)ELT284(Bom)

..... this 'price'. they call it 'value', and 'value' is defined as having the same meaning as in sub-section (1) of section 14 of the customs act, 1962. what is described in section 14(1) as price of the goods at the time and place of importation in the international market is now being described as ..... is also a part of their duty to debit the customs copy of the licence with the value of the imported goods. in what manner ..... of the international value and it did not dispute that assessment. 5. the customs officers have to perform two duties. they have to guard the revenue and assess any imported article on the basis of section 14(1) of the customs act, 1962, and the instructions issued by the government of india in that behalf. it ..... the goods at a bargain price will not enable the authorities to fix the price of goods imported on the basis of section 30 of the sea customs act. if a seller is willing to sell his goods for considerably lower value than its market price the c.i.f. price cannot be said ..... purpose of the offence alleged to have been committed under section 167(8) of the sea customs act, 1878. that was a case on the allegation of mentioning lower import price of goods. the present interpretation put by the customs authorities would lead to the same result, viz. that all valid imports would automatically become .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1979 (HC)

Kirloskar Cummins Limited Vs. Union of India

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-12-1979

Reported in : 1980CENCUS21D

..... section 160 of the customs act. section 12 of the customs act is a charging section and section 12(1) reads as under :- '(i) except as otherwise provided ..... rates, the highest duty. (2) the customs duty referred to in sub-section (1) shall be in addition to any duty imposed under this act or under any law for the time being in force.' the government of india enacted the customs act, 1962 on december 13, 1962 to consolidate and amend the law relating to customs and the sea customs act, 1878 was repealed by the provisions of ..... in this act, or any other law for the time being in force, duties of customs shall be ..... is connected with import and is not a direct tax on the goods but on the act of import itself. the supreme court in special reference no. 1 of 1962 reported in air 1963 supreme court 1760 has observed as follows :- '... in the case of duties of customs including export duties though they are levied with reference to goods, the taxable event is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1979 (HC)

Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Preventive Vs. V.O.S. Ansari

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-17-1979

Reported in : 1980CENCUS151D; 1982(10)ELT69(Mad)

..... .s. ansari (accused 1) and m.k.m. mohammed kassim, the second accused, were tried for an offence under section 135(l)(b)(ii) of the customs act, 1962 and section 85(ii) of the gold control act, 1968. the case of the prosecution was this : on 31-7-1972, a party of central excise officials including thiru raymond pw 2, inspector of central ..... gold involved is a lakh of rupees or less. the offence under section 135(l)(b)(ii) of the customs act, 1962, involves an element of importation of gold within the indian customs waters contrary to any prohibition imposed by or under the provisions of that act or any other law for the time being in force. the offence under section 85(ii) of the ..... in possession or custody or control of any primary gold. therefore it is not possible to agree with the learned chief metropolitan magistrate that the act for which the respondent has been found guilty under section 135(l)(b)(ii) of the customs act, 1962 constitutes the offence for which the respondent has been found guilty under section 85(ii) of the gold control ..... -8-1977 finding the accused guilty of an offence under section 135(l)(b) (in of the customs act, 1962 and an offence under section 85(ii) of the gold control act, 1968 but failing to award any sentence under section 85(ii) of the gold control act, 1968, while imposing a fine of rs. 2000 for the offence under section 135(l)(b)(ii .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1979 (HC)

P.V. AlbIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-02-1979

Reported in : 1979CENCUS489D; 1988(36)ELT262(Ker)

..... to be of proper quality, an exporter can be penalised in cases where he knowingly makes a wrong statement as to the quality of the goods. section 50 of the customs act, 1962 requires the exporter to make a statement as to quality. it reads :-'50. entry of goods for exportation.-(1) the exporter of any goods shall make entry thereof by ..... 1965), (as amended) issued under section 6 of the export (quality control and inspection) act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'quality control act'), why their goods should not be confiscated under sections 113 and 118(b) of the customs act, 1962, and why penalty under section 114 of the customs act should not be imposed upon them. ext. p2 reply was sent by the exporters but ..... their explanation as rejected by ext.p3 order of the collector of customs (the 3rd respondent herein). the collector held that the prohibition contained in ..... wharf. until the goods were subjected to further examination and declared not export-worthy, these goods had not violated the prohibition contained in the notification. section 133(d) of the customs act has been invoked to confiscate these goods, it says:* * * * *'113. confiscation of goods attempted to the importers, exporters, etc.- the following export goods shall be liable to confiscation :-(d) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 1979 (HC)

Durga Shankar Industries Vs. Government of India and

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-06-1979

Reported in : 1979CENCUS213D; 1979(4)ELT227(Mad)

..... refund cannot be considered on merits.2. there was an appeal to the appellate collector of customs. that appeal also failed, the appellate authority taking the view that ..... the appellant's application for refund was rejected by the assistant collector of customs on the ground that the application for refund having been filed after the expiry of the time limit of six months prescribed under section 27 of the customs act, 1962, the same was barred and, therefore, the appellant's claim for ..... to hold that even if the appellant's claim for refund cannot be considered by the authorities below, in view of section 27 of the customs act, this court can grant relief to the appellant by issuing a writ of mandamus if it is found that the excess import duty collected from it ..... excess duty is entitled to get a refund of the same and that though the authorities cannot entertain a revision application under section 27 of the customs act, beyond a period of six months from the date of payment, that will not inhibit the court from granting the necessary relief by way of ..... petition was dismissed at the admission stage by ismail j.3. the view taken by the learned judge was that section 27(1) of the customs act having prescribed a time limit for preferring a-claim for refund and the appellant not having made the claim within the prescribed time limit and it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 1979 (HC)

Radient Industries Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-10-1979

Reported in : 1980(6)ELT21(Raj)

..... the petitioner's firm failed to deposit the government dues before the appealt could be considered and dismissed the same for noncompliance of the provisions of section 129 of the customs act, 1962 read with notification no. 68/63, dated 4-5-1963 of the government of india, ministry of finance (deptt. of revenue), new delhi. the petitioner then filed a revision before ..... , a person aggrieved by any decision or order has an unfettered right to appeal, section 129 of the customs act, 1962 which is made applicable to duties imposed under the central excises and salt act by notification under section 12 of the act requires the appellant to deposit the duty or penalty pending an appeal, section129 thus whittles down the substantive right of appeal under ..... section 35 and accordingly it cannot be regarded as 'procedure relating to appeal' within section 12 of the central excises and salt act. the notification, dated 4-5-1963 applying section 129 of the customs act is, therefore, not valid.' 4. it is, no doubt, true that the appeal was wrongly rejected by the' collector of central excises, but in ..... relief in the duty under the notification dated 6-10-1965. the petitioner had made a contravention of section 6 read with section 9 of the central excises and' salt act, 1954 read with rule 174 of the central excises rules, 1954 in having been found to have engaged in the manufacture of bare copper wire without a license. the petitioner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1979 (HC)

Euresian Equipments and Chemicals Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Collector of C ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-24-1979

Reported in : AIR1980Cal188,1979(2)CHN248,1980(6)ELT38(Cal)

..... india, : [1970]3scr445 , the division bench observed at p. 506:'furthermore, it appears that goods are not export goods as denned under section 2(19) of the customs act, 1962, section 2(19) of the customs act, 196? defines 'export goods' as goods which are to be taken out of india to a place outside india. the goods which had already been exported pursuant to ..... any application in the instant case, as the goods in respect of which the violation is alleged had already been exported. referring to the provisions of section 113 of the customs act 1962, mr. burman contends that on a true construction of the said section, the said section cannot be said to have any application to a case where goods have actually been ..... concerned for the misdeclaration of the goods and values of the goods exported and hence liable for penal action under section 114(1) of the customs act, 1962. m/s. euresian equipments and chemicals ltd. calcutta and its directors s/sri laxmi prasad jajodia, manick chand jajodia and jugole kishore jajodia are hereby called upon to explain the ..... . g. s. r. 2641 dated 14-11-69. by virtue of section 23a the prohibition also falls under section 11 of the customs act 1962, and hence the goods were liable to confiscation under section 113 (d) and (i) of the customs act, 1962. m/s. euresian equipments & chemicals ltd. calcutta, s/sri laxmi prasad jajodia, manick chand jajodia and jugal kishore jajodia are the persons .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 1979 (HC)

Dhanraj Chhajar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-10-1979

Reported in : 1982(10)ELT963(Cal)

..... show that the goods are not of nepalese origin. in the facts and circumstances, it must be held that there has been no contravention of the customs act, 1962 with regard to transit of these goods through india for the purpose of export to a foreign country. as i have already noted, it was admitted ..... the period of six months for issuing a show cause notice as contemplated by section 110 of the customs act, 1962 has not yet expired. therefore, the respondents were not under an obligation to release the goods.10. in my view, this contention of mr. bose ..... goods from being put on the board the ship on the basis of certain further alleged information. mr. bose contended that under the provisions of the customs act, 1962 there was no prohibition against a second seizure of the same goods. since the second seizure, if any, took place on the 9th february, 1979 ..... of the owner of the party'.7. mr. tarun bose, appearing on behalf of the respondent drew my attention to large number of sections of the customs act, 1962 in support of the contention that the instant case cannot be one of the seizure. admittedly, the goods are in the custody of the calcutta port ..... support of his case. in the first place, he contended that the first consignment was seized on the 24th july, 1978 under section 110 of the customs act, 1962. if no show cause notice was issued within six months from the date of seizure, it was incumbent on the respondent to release the goods.6. .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1979 (HC)

Harchand Vs. Additional Collector of Customs and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-03-1979

Reported in : 1981(8)ELT699(Cal)

..... and set aside.26. mr kar, appearing for the answering respondents after placing the cause title, the grounds and the reliefs claimed, contended that since the sea customs act, 1878, after the incorporation of the customs act, 1962, has become non est, so no interference in these proceedings can or should be made. he also, as a preliminary point argued, that since the order of ..... three months from the accrual of such cause.'28. the orders as impeached in this case were all made or passed after the incorporation and coming into force of the customs act, 1962 on february 1, 1963, and as such the initiation itself and the determinations that followed, have been appropriately contended by mr. bajoria to be a nullity. the filing of the ..... -(a) for section 2, the following section shall be substituted, namely: -'2. duties specified in the schedules to be levied.-the rates at which duties of customs shall be levied under the customs act, 1962, are specified in the first and second schedules.'(b) sections 5 and 6 shall stand repealed.(3) notwithstanding the repeal of :any enactment by this section,-(a) any ..... makes provisions for removal of difficulties. so the steps as taken or initiated under the sea customs act, 1878, if they are not inconsistent with the provisions of customs act, 1962, should be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provisions of the customs act. in this connection and in order to appreciate the argument as advanced, a reference to section 6 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

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