Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Order Reducing Penalty On IPL Broadcasting Equipment Importer To ₹50 Lakh
Kirit Singhania
30 Oct 2026 11:03 AM IST
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to interfere with a Delhi High Court order reducing the customs penalty imposed on Eastern Broadcast Solutions Pvt Ltd (EBSPL) in a case concerning the alleged misdeclaration of broadcasting equipment temporarily imported for covering IPL and other cricket events organised by the BCCI.
The company challenged the Settlement Commission's order before the Delhi High Court. The High Court partly allowed the petition. It upheld the penalty imposed on EBSPL but reduced it from ₹2 crore to ₹50 lakh, taking into account the payment of approximately ₹9.73 crore in customs duty.
A division bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar refused to interfere with the Delhi High Court's decision, observing that there was no sufficient reason to disturb the relief granted by the High Court. The Court observed:
“We do not find any good reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the High Court.”
Appearing for the Union of India, Additional Solicitor General S. Dwarkanath argued that the directors could not escape personal liability merely because the company had been held liable under the Customs Act.
However, the Court said it was not inclined to interfere with the high Court order and dismissed Union's petition.
The case arose from the import of broadcasting equipment by Eastern Broadcast Solutions Pvt Ltd, an associate of Singapore based Broadcast Solutions Pvt Ltd for covering IPL and other cricket events organised by the BCCI. The equipment was temporarily imported through a Special Economic Zone but was declared as being brought in for “DEMO” purposes instead of for commercial use.
Following an investigation by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, the authorities alleged misdeclaration to evade customs duty. The Customs Settlement Commission determined the customs duty at approximately ₹9.73 crore and imposed a penalty of ₹2 crore on the company, besides penalties on its two directors.
It also quashed the penalties imposed on the two directors, observing that the benefit from the alleged misdeclaration was sought by the company and not by the directors in their individual capacities.