Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback for the period 2 to 8 February 2025.
Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court Directs DRI, DGGI, Customs Dept., GST Dept. To Prepare SOP Ensuring Counsel’s Are Appearance
Case Title: M/S Vishal Video And Appliances Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Delhi High Court has directed the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Directorate of General GST Intelligence (DGGI), Customs Department and Central GST (CGST) to prepare SOP to ensure advance copies are served and counsels are appearing.
Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court Quashes DGFT SCN Issued To Essar Shipping Citing Res Judicata
The Bombay High Court has quashed the show cause notice issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) to Essar Shipping citing the principle of res judicata.
Bail Condition Requiring Alleged Customs Duty Evader To Surrender Passport Every Time He Returns From Abroad Is Onerous: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Mohammad Hanif Nurani Versus State of Maharashtra & Anrs.
The Bombay High Court has directed the court/Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) to return the passport and held that bail condition requiring alleged customs duty evader to surrender passport every time he returns from abroad is onerous.
Madras High Court
Jewellery Worn In Person Will Not Come Under Purview Of Baggage Rules: Madras High Court
Case Title: Thanushika Versus The Principal Commissioner of Customs (Chennai)
The Madras High Court has held that the jewellery worn in person will not come under the purview of Baggage Rules.
Customs Officer Forcefully Snatched Mangalsutra From Sri Lankan Citizen: Madras High Court Directs Enquiry Against Customs Officers
The Madras High Court directed the enquiry against the customs officer for seizing the Mangalsutra of Sri Lankan citizen seized without following principles of natural justice.
Jharkhand High Court
Jharkhand High Court Directs Dept. To Restore Amount Of Rs. 30.30 Crores Along With Statutory Interest In Electronic Credit Ledger Of SAIL
Case Title: M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited Versus The State of Jharkhand
In a major relief to Steel Authority of India (SAIL), the Jharkhand High Court has directed the department to restore the amount of Rs. 30.30 crores along with statutory interest in electronic credit ledger of SAIL.
CESTAT
Rule 96ZO Of Central Excise Rules Is Self Contained Scheme And Provisions Of Section 11B Of Central Excise Act Is Not Applicable: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Jaidev Alloys Ltd. Versus Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Rajkot
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Rule 96ZO of Central Excise Rules is a self contained scheme and provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act is not applicable.
Details Of Suppression Of Facts Only In SCN, Limitation Period Can’t Be Invoked: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Shape Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner (Appeals – I), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that details of suppression of facts only in Show Cause Notice (SCN), limitation period cannot be invoked.
No Customs Officer Empowered To Assess Two Or More Shipping Bills Together: CESTAT
Case Title: M/S Disha Realcon Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner Of Customs-Adjudication
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no officer of Customs including the DRI officers and the Commissioner of Customs has any power under the law to assess two or more Shipping Bills together or determine the Fe content or any other parameter combining goods covered by two or more Shipping Bills, even if they are loaded in the same vessel.
