Bunker Supply Of Fuel To ASEAN Explorer Is Duty-Free Export: CESTAT Quashes Excise Demand Against Bharat Petroleum

The Bangalore Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that bunker supplies of High Viscosity Furnace Oil (HVFO) made by Bharat Petroleum to the vessel to 'cable ship ASEAN explorer' qualify as duty-free exports under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, read with Notification No. 46/2001-CE(NT). P.A. Augustian (Judicial Member) and Pullela Nageswara Rao (Technical Member) examined whether the supplies of High Viscosity Furnace Oil (HVFO)...

No Service Tax On Income Received From Joint Venture: CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside ₹5.72 Crore Demand

The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that an assessee's/partner's share of income from a joint venture is not consideration for any taxable service and therefore not liable to Service Tax. R. Muralidhar (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) observed that the activities undertaken by a partner/co-venturer for the mutual benefit of the partnership/joint venture cannot be regarded as a service rendered by one...

CESTAT Delhi Sets Aside ₹1 Crore Interest, Penalty On Hindustan Zinc For Reversed CENVAT Credit

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has set aside disallowance of CENVAT credit as well as interest and penalty worth about Rs. 1 crore for electricity wheeled out to sister concerns as well as to State Electricity Board. In an order dated November 24, 2025, the Bench comprising Justice Dilip Gupta (Principal Bench) and Smt. Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) set aside six orders, notices creating excise duty demand on input and input ...

Importer Not Liable To Pay Customs Duty On Goods Not Received By Him: Bombay High Court Grants Refund

The Bombay High Court has held that an importer cannot be made liable to pay customs duty on goods that were never cleared for home consumption and were never received by the importer. The Court observed that, under Sections 13, 23 and 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, duty paid in anticipation of clearance becomes refundable once it is established that the goods were short-landed or lost before clearance.A division bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna was hearing a petition filed by M/s...

S.128A Customs Act | Six-Month Timeline To Decide Appeals Not Mandatory, But Must Apply Where Possible: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that though Section 128A(4A) of the Customs Act, 1962 prescribes that appeals “shall” be decided within six months, the timeline is applicable only where it is possible to do so.Perusing the language in which the provision is couched, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed,“...it uses the word 'shall'. However, the provision also stipulates that the said period is to be adhered where it is possible to do so.”The observation was made...

GST Migration Not Taxpayer's Burden: Delhi HC Directs CESTAT To Hear Appeal After Pre-Deposit Was Made Under Excise Head Due To Portal Failure

The Delhi High Court has held that where the Service Tax portal had become non-functional after the migration to the GST regime, the taxpayer cannot be compelled to make the mandatory pre-deposit strictly under the Service Tax ledger for maintainability of an appeal. The Court observed that once the deposit has already gone to the Government exchequer under the Excise Head. A Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Saurabh Banerjee was hearing a writ petition ...

Revenue Cannot Treat Turnover Mismatch As Duty Evasion Without Examining On Merits: CESTAT Mumbai

The CESTAT Mumbai has held that when an assessee shows sufficient cause for delay in filing an appeal within the statutorily permissible condonable period of 30 days, the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot reject the appeal on limitation without examining the merits. A Bench of the CESTAT comprising of Member (Technical) M.M. Parthiban was hearing the appeal, challenging the order of the Commissioner(Appeal) whereby appeal of the assessee was dismissed as time-barred by 26 days and thereby...

Delhi High Court Imposes ₹50K Costs On Customs For “Harassing” Companies Importing Body Massagers

The Delhi High Court has slammed the Customs Department for “unnecessarily harassing” two entities involved in import of body massagers.Petitioners' import goods were confiscated for alleged mis-declaration of sex toys as body massagers. While ordering their provisional release, the Court had previously asked the Department to come up with a uniform policy permitting or prohibiting the import of such products.The Department however sought a review of this direction.A division bench of Justices...

Customs | Oral Waiver Of SCN Untenable In Law, Continued Detention Of Goods Illegal: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that continued detention or seizure of goods by the Customs Department would be untenable in law, where the Show Cause Notice or the personal hearing have been waived via an oral waiver.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain was dealing with a challenge to detention of Petitioner's gold chain weighing 54 grams.Briefly put, Petitioner has residence certificate of Dubai. Her gold jewellery, which is stated to be a personal effect item, was...

Statement Made Before Customs Officer U/S 108 Customs Act Over Goods Seizure Not Admissible In Evidence: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that statements made by an assessee to the Customs Department under Section 108 of the Customs Act 1962, upon seizure of its goods, is not admissible as evidence in court of law.“Statements under Section 108 would not be admissible in evidence,” said a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain.Section 108 deals with the power of customs officers to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents. It stipulates that any Gazetted Officer of...

S.110 Customs Act | Extension To Issue SCN Must Be Granted Before Expiry Of Initial Six-Month Period: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the six-month extension contemplated under Section 110 of the Customs Act 1962 for issuance of a show cause notice after detention of goods by the Customs must be issued before expiry of the initial six-month window.For context, Section 110 deals with Seizure of goods. It stipulates that where any goods are seized, and no notice is given within six months of the seizure, the goods shall be returned. Provided that the Principal Commissioner may, for...

Delhi HC Allows Time-Barred Appeal Against Customs' Confiscation Of Gold, Says Traveller Cannot Be Left Remediless Due To Wrong Legal Advice

The Delhi High Court recently allowed an air traveller to prefer a time-barred appeal against confiscation of gold by the Customs Department, upon his arrival from Thailand.In doing so, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain said, “the Petitioner cannot be rendered completely remediless in this matter as he may have proceeded on the legal advice.”The Petitioner had claimed that he was wrongly advised by the Customs Department that there is no remedy available, as absolute...