The case involved a penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act, 1962 ...

CESTAT sets aside penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act due to lack of admissible evidence.

Case Laws Customs

June 7, 2024

The case involved a penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act, 1962 for mis-declaration of export goods leading to undue duty drawback benefit. The issue was the admissibility of statements u/s 138B and WhatsApp messages u/s 138C as evidence. The Appellate Tribunal held that statements were inadmissible as witnesses were not examined or offered for cross-examination, violating legal practices. Similarly, WhatsApp messages lacked specific mention of appellant's involvement and were not obtained following the procedure u/s 138C. Consequently, the penalty imposed was deemed legally unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 25 Lakh.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case involved a penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act, 1962 ...

CESTAT sets aside penalty u/s 114(iii) of Customs Act due to lack of admissible evidence.

Case Laws Customs

June 7, 2024

You may also like:

Penalty imposed u/s 114(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 for alleged abetment of illegal export by arranging lorries. Lack of admissible evidence showing knowledge of goods...

Undervaluation of imported goods - Patchouli Oil - The CESTAT found that the rejection of the declared value lacked legal basis and was unsupported by evidence. The...

CESTAT Chennai held that penalty u/s 114 Customs Act was not imposed on Respondents for smuggling undeclared cigarettes concealed with gypsum plaster. Penalty was...

Levy of penalty u/ss 114(i) and 114(iii) of the Customs Act without evidence of abetment in the export of red sanders. The appellant failed to obtain and verify the KYC...

Sec 112 (a) of the Customs Act 1962 has been mentioned for imposing penalty in the SCN but Adjudicating authority has imposed penalty under Sec 114 without giving any...

Levy of penalty u/s 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling - Red Sanders - prohibited goods or not - There is total lack of investigation on the aspects of who broke the...

Levy of penalty u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on Customs Broker - All the allegations if any, would fall under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. No...

Penalty for non deduction of tax at source - bona fide belief proved - penalty set aside - AT

Levy of penalty u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling - The reason for imposing the impugned penalty is that the appellant has not verified the Let Export...

Levy of penalty on CHA u/s 114 (iii) and Section 114AA respectively of the Customs Act, 1962 - allegation of abatement - fraudulent export to claim duty drawback - The...

Imposition of penalties u/s 114(iii) of the CA, 1962 - If the officers who are respondents herein had not examined the cargo are not associated with the said shipping...

Penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission u/s 271(1)(c) - The petitioner argued against the penalty, citing lack of mens rea and the absence of evidence showing...

Smuggling - illegal importation of the seized gold - Confiscation of the gold and Indian currency - The Tribunal found no evidence linking the seized Indian currency to...

The appellants, who were neither exporters nor Customs House Agents (CHAs), were wrongly penalized u/ss 114 and 114AA for overvaluation of goods for claiming excess duty...

Levy of penalty - Smuggling of Gold - seizure - Commissioner (Appels) set aside the penalty - The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish the Respondents...

Quick Updates: