The High Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the Customs, ...

Exporter's right to cross-examine evidence upheld, penalties set aside for lack of due process.

October 24, 2024

Case Laws Customs HC

The High Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) correctly set aside the order imposing penalties u/ss 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The Department failed to follow the procedure u/s 138B of the Act by denying the exporter's request to cross-examine the Chemical Examiner whose report formed the basis of the allegations. The CESTAT rightly found that the statements relied upon could not be used as relevant evidence without affording the exporter an opportunity for cross-examination, as mandated by Section 138B, unless exceptional circumstances existed, which were not present in this case. The High Court upheld the CESTAT's decision, as no substantial question of law arose.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The High Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the Customs, ...

Exporter's right to cross-examine evidence upheld, penalties set aside for lack of due process.

October 24, 2024

Case Laws Customs HC

You may also like:

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving contravention of section 9(1)(f)(i) of FERA 1973. The appellant argued lack of material and violation of natural...

Dishonour of Cheque - right of the accused to cross examine the complainant - The trial Court, committed error in observing that the petitioner is silent on the specific...

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...

Central Excise demands cannot be sustained solely based on confessional statements without corroborative documentary evidence. Retracted affidavits cannot be relied upon...

Clandestine removal of goods denied CENVAT credit. Liability for duty, interest, and penalty from FY 2007-08 to 2011-12 assessed. Differential duty demand of Rs....

Violation of principles of natural justice - denial of cross-examination - revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty imposed by...

Service tax demand on Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services rendered on reverse charge basis set aside as appellant did not collect service tax from service recipient....

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...

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...

Penalty u/s 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 was levied against appellants, Customs House Agents (CHAs), for not exercising due diligence. The allegation was that appellants...

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...

The case pertains to a duty drawback claim where the exporter (appellant) allegedly misdeclared the export goods, leading to an excess drawback claim of Rs 20,394/-. The...

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

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...

Revocation of customs broker license invalid due to contradictory findings - forefeiture of security deposit and penalty levy set aside - no evidence of subletting...

Quick Updates: