The Customs Tribunal holds that Section 28 demands are invalid unless assessment is final, overturning penalties for undervaluation where provisional clearance occurred.
The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that a Show Cause Notice issued beyond one year from clearance is time-barred, regardless of alleged misclassification, reinforcing limitation principles under Section 28.
The CESTAT holds that failure to permit cross-examination of witnesses whose statements are relied upon violates natural justice, mandating remand under Section 138B of the Customs Act.
Bombay High Court holds that confiscation of personal gold without Section 124 notice violates due process; authorities must restore value or equivalent gold.
CESTAT holds that imported raw ingredients like Tendofit, Mobilee, and GG Orosoluble must be classified based on their condition at import, not intended use, overturning Department's classification under Chapter 21.
Madras High Court directs provisional release of detained imported goods under Section 110A of Customs Act, 1962, despite missing BIS/DGFT certifications, setting precedent for similar cases.
Madras High Court holds that authorities must disclose administrative documents upon request, affirming natural justice and procedural fairness under Article 226.
CESTAT Hyderabad holds that crushing, screening, and washing of manganese ore constitute manufacture under Chapter Note 4, disqualifying it from CVD exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-CE.
The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that suspension of a customs broker's license under Regulation 16 of CBLR, 2018 does not require an offence report, clarifying procedural thresholds for immediate action.
The Tribunal holds that declared transaction value is invalid if part of consideration is paid through unauthorized channels, establishing mandatory rejection under Customs Valuation Rules.
Customs Tribunal holds that squid liver powder mixed with 40-50% soyabean meal is classifiable under CTH 2309 as a formulated animal feed, not under 2301.
The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that importers must prove transaction value is not influenced by related-party status under Rule 3(b) of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.