Hybrid/Pure Matrix Cards For PTN Equipment Classifiable Under CTI 8517 70 10: CESTAT Quashes Customs Duty Against Vodafone Idea

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Hybrid/Pure Matrix Cards for PTN Equipment would be classifiable under CTI 8517 70 10 as “parts of goods, and Small Form Factor Pluggable for Packet Transport Network (PTN) Equipment would be classifiable under CTI 8517 70 90.The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that NIC is effectively a translator, which allows a computer to communicate with a...

Customs Brokers Not Liable Once Verification Of Address Is Completed: Delhi CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the responsibility of the customs broker under Regulation 10(n) does not include keeping continuous surveillance on the client to ensure that he continues to operate from that address and has not changed his operations. The bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) observed that once verification of the address is completed by a Customs Broker, if the client moves to...

Dept. Can't Challenge Customs Duty Demand, Below Threshold Limit Prescribed By CBIC: CESTAT

The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), while dismissing the department's appeal, held that the department is precluded from challenging the commissioner's order if customs duty demand is below the threshold limit prescribed by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).The bench of S. S. Garg (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has observed that the amount of duty involved in the appeal is below the threshold...

Responsibility Of Customs Broker Does Not Include Keeping Continuous Surveillance On Client: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the responsibility of the customs broker under Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 does not include keeping continuous surveillance on the client.The bench of Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the responsibility of the customs broker under Regulation 10(n) does not include keeping continuous surveillance on the client to...

Aircraft Used Only For Providing Non-Scheduled Passenger Services Entitled For Customs Exemption: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the aircraft used only for providing non-scheduled passenger services is entitled to customs exemption.The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the conditions of exemption notification were not complied with as the appellant therein had not used the aircraft for rendering any 'Air Transport Service' within the meaning of Rule 3(9) of the Aircraft...

Royalty Not Includible In Transaction Value Of Imported Raw Materials To Demand Any Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the royalty is not included in the transaction value of the imported raw materials to demand any differential customs duty.The bench of Sulekha Beevi C.S. (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the royalty payment is only for providing technical assistance for the manufacture and sale of licensed products, and the import of raw materials is incidental to such...

Customs Duty Amount Involved Is Less Than Threshold Limit: CESTAT Dismissed Dept.'s Appeal

The Chandigarh Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has dismissed the dept.'s appeal, in which the customs duty amount involved is less than Rs. 50 lakhs.The bench of S. S. Garg (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has observed that the appeals do fall within the instructions as prescribed in the circular dated November 2, 2023. The CESTAT, the High Courts, and the Supreme Court have been consistently dismissing the appeals of the Revenue if they are...

No Confiscation If Prior Permission Taken From Customs Dept. For Storage Of Non-Bonded Goods In Bonded Warehouse: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the provisions of Sections 111(j) and 111(h) of the Customs Act cannot be invoked when prior permission is given by the customs authorities for the storage of non-bonded goods in a bonded warehouse after payment of due duty.The bench of S.K. Mohanty (Judicial Member) and M.M. Parthiban (Technical Member) has observed that all the imported bulk liquid cargo brought into the vessels was unloaded, stored,...

Statements Recorded Under Section 108 Of Customs Act, 1962 Are Admissible Before Court Of Law: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, are admissible before a court of law.The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Judicial Member) has observed that the Customs Broker, in his statement recorded under Section 108, accepted that he has not verified the antecedents of the importer as the documents were handed over by Shri Badlani, an associate of Shri...

No Customs Duty Exemption Available To Battery Fuse Units, CESTAT Dismisses Bharti Airtel's Appeal

The Bangalore bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), while dismissing the appeal filed by Bharti Airtel, held that no customs duty exemption is available to battery fuse units (BFU).The bench of D.M. Misra (Judicial Member) and R. Bhagya Devi (Technical Member) has observed that the BFU is not an integral part of the communication system as claimed by Bharti Airtel. The appellant/assessee imported and cleared battery fuse units (BFU) under Chapter Heading 8529...

Obligation Of CHA Cannot Be Stretched To Undertake Background Check Of Client, Revoking Customs Brokers License Not Sustainable: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the obligation of the Customs House Agent under Section 13(e) of the CHALR, 2004 cannot be stretched to it being obliged to undertake a further background check of the client. The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that Regulation 10(n) requires the customs broker to verify the identity of the client using reliable, independent, authentic...

Illegal Actions Of Importer Firms Subsequent To Cargo Clearance From Customs Station Does Not Make Customs Broker Liable: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the illegal actions of the importer firms subsequent to the clearance of the cargo from the Customs Station do not attract a violation on the part of the Customs Broker.The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the customs broker, in order to verify the existence of the premises of the two importer firms, sent letters by speed post asking them to...