CUSTOMS
No Unfettered Right To Cross-Examine Person Making Statements U/S 138(B) Customs Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a person facing charges under the Customs Act, 1962 does not have an unfettered right under Section 138B, to cross-examine the informant or person making incriminatory statements.Section 138(B) of the Customs Act of 1962 deals with the admissibility of statements made during customs proceedings.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma relied on Kanungo & Co. v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta and Others (1983) where a...
Imposition Of Conditions By Customs For Provisional Release Of Seized Goods 'Discretionary': Delhi HC Tunes Down 130% Bank Guarantee
The Delhi High Court has held that the imposition and severity of conditions imposed by the Customs Department for permitting provisional release of seized goods is “discretionary” in nature.In doing so, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma scaled down the alleged onerous condition imposed on an importer, for executing a Bank Guarantee of 130% of the deferential duty.It observed, “The calculated amount for the bank guarantee would be substantial and may almost...
Baggage Rules Apply Only To Luggage Of International Travellers, Not To 'Reasonable Amount' Of Jewellery Worn In-Person: Madras HC
The Madras High Court has made it clear that Baggage Rule, 2016 framed under the Customs Act, 1962 apply only to the baggage carried by an international traveller.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that the Rules cannot be extended to articles like jewellery, “carried on the person” of a traveller.The bench observed, “The Customs Act, 1962, enables the Central Government to make Rules to the extent of the articles carried in the baggage of a passenger and not for the articles, which were carried...
Communication Modules Are Imported Independently, Not As Part Of Communication Hubs Or Smart Meters: CESTAT Quashes Customs Duty
The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that imported communication modules function independently as parts of communication hubs, classifiable under CTI 8517 70 90. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) have observed that “since the communication modules were imported, they should be classified as such. The correct classification of the communication modules is CTI 8517 70 90.”“Since...
Ensure Counsel Appearing On Advance Service Are Instructed Properly: Delhi HC Asks Customs, GST Department, DRI And DGGI To Frame SOP
The Delhi High Court has asked the Customs Department, the Central GST Department, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Directorate of General GST Intelligence (DGGI) to make sure that counsel representing them on advance service are instructed properly.A bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma ordered the Commissioner of Customs to prepare an SOP as to the manner in which the Department shall ensure that instructions are given to the nominated Counsels in the matter...
Foreign Nationals Coming To India Not Required To Declare Personal Gold Jewellery To Customs: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that foreign nationals coming to India need not declare to the Customs Department their gold jewellery which they are carrying for bonafide personal use.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma further held that the Customs Department must make a distinction between 'jewellery' and 'personal jewellery', while seizing items for violation of the Baggage Rules, 2016 which are framed under the Customs Act, 1962.Thus in the facts and...
Once Court Orders Release Of Bank Guarantee Furnished By Trader, Customs Dept Can't Hold Back Compliance And Direct Adjustment In Demand Order: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that once a court of law directs the Customs Department to release the bank guarantee furnished by a trader, the Department cannot turn around and say that the amount will be adjusted towards the final demand order.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma were dealing with the writ petition moved by a firm importing gold jewellery. The firm had availed the benefit of an exemption Notification, which it claimed granted the benefit...
Customs Dept Cannot Run Parallel Proceedings By Passing Penalty Order While Challenge To SCN Is Pending Before Court: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has set aside a final order of penalty passed by the Customs Department against a paper trader for alleged undervaluation of imported goods, stating that the same was passed during pendency of challenge to the show cause notice (SCN) issued to the trader.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma observed, “passing of the impugned Order-in-Original while the impugned SCN was under challenge before this Court would amount to initiation of parallel...
Trader Cannot Accept Settlement Commission's Order U/S 127C Of Customs Act 'In Parts': Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that an order passed by the Settlement Commission under Section 127C of the Customs Act, 1962 is in the nature of a 'settlement' and cannot be accepted by a trader only in part.A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed, “Given the nature of the order passed under Section 127C of the Act – which is in the nature of a settlement – it would not be permissible to dissect the same and accept that parts of the order...
Importation Of Wireless Access Points Which Operate Solely On MIMO Technology Exempt From Customs Duty: Delhi High Court
Coming to the rescue of an IT distribution company, the Delhi High Court has held that the import of Wireless Access Points (WAPs), which operate on MIMO technology, are exempt from Customs duty.In doing so, the division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held that the word “and” used between 'MIMO and LTE Products', which are eligible for exemption under the relevant notification issued by the Centre, is disjunctive.It thus rejected the Customs'...
Customs Dept Cannot Encash Bank Guarantee Furnished By Trader During Pendency Of Appeal If Pre-Deposit Is Made: Delhi HC Affirms
Based on a circular issued by the Finance Ministry, the Delhi High Court has affirmed that the Customs Department cannot encash the bank guarantee furnished by a trader, whose import/export transactions are in dispute, if the latter has made a pre-deposit with his appeal against the demand and penalty. A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma observed, “A perusal of the Circular and the clauses extracted above would show that no coercive measures can be...
Goods Loaded Without Proper Documents Can't Be Exported Without Clearance By Customs Officials: CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside Penalty
Stating that goods wrongly loaded by the steamer agent could not have been exported without clearance by the Customs officials themselves, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata set aside the penalty imposed under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The provision stipulates a penalty for attempting to export goods improperly. The Appellant, a steamer agent, was saddled with Rs. 2 lakh penalty for exporting goods without Let Export Order (LEO). Noting...