High Court
Customs Can Clone Data Of Seized Electronic Devices As Per Statutory Procedure, Need Not Retain Devices Throughout Prosecution: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has called upon the Customs Department to clone the required data from seized electronic devices of persons allegedly involved in smuggling and other violations under the Act, instead of retaining such devices throughout prosecutions.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that such a practice will not only ensure that the Department does not lose the data due to the seized device getting outdated but it will also provide make the...
S.110 Customs Act | SCN Cannot Be Issued After One Year, Detention Of Goods Impermissible: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that detention of goods by the Customs Department cannot continue beyond a period of one year, if a show cause notice was not issued to the assessee within such period.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta cited Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 which prescribes a period of six months. Further, subject to complying with certain formalities, a further extension for a period of six months for the Department to issue a show cause...
Customs Department Can't Invoke Expired Bank Guarantees: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court stated that invocation of the expired bank guarantees by Customs Department is not permissible under law. The Division Bench of Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Easwaran S. was addressing the issue of whether customs department can invoke expired bank guarantees. The assessee/appellant has filed an appeal challenging the order of Single Judge who found that the challenge to the invocation of the Bank Guarantees cannot be made, except on fraud or...
Determination Of Anti-Dumping Duties Is A Time-Bound Process By Competent Authority, Writ Courts Will Be Hesitant To Interfere: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that writ petitions challenging the determination of anti-dumping duties by Directorate General of Trade Remedies are maintainable however, since the determination is a time bound process, Courts will not readily interfere in the process.Anti-dumping investigation determines whether a product is being dumped in the country at a lower price, causing material injury to the domestic industry. If found true, the DGTR may impose anti-dumping duties on the importer of...
Delhi High Court Orders Customs To Release 'Name Engraved' Gold Jewellery Of Indian Tourist
The Delhi High Court has ordered the Customs Department to release the gold kada of an Indian tourist, which was seized upon his return to the country after a visit to the Republic of Mali.Petitioner had argued that the jewellery was a personal effect, as evident from engraving of his first name on the same, and was thus exempted from duty.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta ordered that the jewellery be released within four weeks.Petitioner had claimed that...
'Comedy Of Errors': Delhi HC On CESTAT Passing Contradictory Orders In Appeal Which Did Not Meet Its Pecuniary Jurisdiction
The Delhi High Court recently took a critical view of the Customs Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi for repeatedly passing contradictory orders in an appeal, which should have been dismissed for want of pecuniary jurisdiction.“This order reveals a complete comedy of error…The petition reveals an unfortunate situation wherein the CESTAT while intending to correct an error in its initial order…continued to make repeated errors resulting in the impugned order and the present...
Delhi High Court To Examine Scope Of Customs Jurisdiction Under E-Cigarettes Act After Seizure Of "De-Addiction" Devices
The Delhi High Court is set to examine the extent of jurisdiction which can be exercised by the Customs Department under the Prohibition of Electronic Cigarettes (Production, Manufacture, Import, Transport, Sale, Distribution, Storage and Advertisement) Act, 2019.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta have sought the authority's response on a private company's petition challenging seizure of its imported “empty atomizer devices” purportedly to be put to use for...
Customs Dept Repeatedly Told To Serve Notices, Orders On Assessee Via Email: Delhi High Court Seeks Compliance
The Delhi High Court has asked the Customs Department to scrupulously comply with its “repeated” direction to serve notices, orders on an assessee under the Customs Act, 1962 via email.Traditionally, correspondence related to any violation of the Act is made via post. However, with advent of technology and to avoid delays, Court had in Bonanza Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs & Anr. (2024) called upon the Department to send notices via email, in addition to service by...
Delhi High Court Orders Customs Department To Release Arab Minor's Jewellery Which She Wore Since Childhood
The Delhi High Court has ordered the Customs Department to release the personal jewellery of a minor from UAE who had come to India to attend a relative's wedding.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta passed the direction after perusing a photograph, depicting that she used to wear the said pieces of jewelry since childhood. It observed,“This Court has now pronounced several orders/judgments, following various judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court,...
'Cannot Be Forced To Repeatedly Approach Court': Delhi HC Orders Release Of Iran National's Jewellery Confiscated By Customs Almost 3 Yrs Ago
The Delhi High Court ordered the Customs Department to release the silver-coated gold chains of an Iranian national, which were confiscated on his arrival in India almost three years ago.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta noted that the prescribed period of six months for issuance of a Show Cause Notice had already elapsed.Further, no personal hearing was granted to the Petitioner, who sought the release of his jewelry, and no final order was served on him...
Subsequent Notice U/S 28(4) Customs Act Cannot Be 'Supplementary' To Prior Notice U/S 28(1), Both Provisions Operate In Separate Fields: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that notices under Section 28(1) and Section 28(4) of the Customs Act 1962 operate in different scenarios and even by an exaggerated stretch, cannot possibly be said to be interchangeably issued.Section 28 relates to recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded. It provides for two separate types of notices: One under Section 28(4) where elements of collusion, wilful mis-statement and suppression are made out in...
S.28(4) Customs Act | Genuine Disagreement With Department Regarding Classification Of Goods Not 'Suppression Of Facts' By Trader: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that merely because there is disagreement between the Customs department and a trader regarding the classification of the latter's goods for the purpose of levying duty, it does not mean that the trader has indulged in 'suppression of facts' from the Department.The expression is relevant in terms of Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, which provides for the recovery of duty not paid or short paid where elements of collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression...