Advanced Search Results
J.K. Synthetics Limited and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Delhi
Nov-13-2006
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2(23), 8, 12, 12(2), 14, 14(1), 15, 25, 25(1) and 47; Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 9A; Tariff Act, 1934 - Sections 2A; Central Excises Act, 1944; Wealth Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 2; Finance Act 1982; Central Excise Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance 1982; Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944; Central Excise Rules - Rule 8(1)
138(2007)DLT660; 2006(204)ELT369(Del)
No. 102 Cus dated 1.7.1977 the Central Government, in exercise of its powers under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Act'), exempted DMT when imported into India from customs duty in excess of 100% ad valorem. In effect, … behalf of the respondents, it was contended by Mr. Sanjay Katyal, learned Advocate, that a plain reading of Section 14 of the Act indicated that landing charges were liable to be included in the assessable value for the
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSuper Traders and Another Vs. Union of India and Others Overruled
Delhi
Sep-23-1982
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2(23), 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 25 and 129; Customs Tariff Act, 1975; Customs Tariff (Amendment) Act, 1982; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19 and 304
1983(12)ELT258(Del)
of duty because duty of customs is chargeable on any goods by reference to their value as per Section 14 of Customs Act 1962. The rate of duty livable under 73.15(2) is ad valorem and uniform namely 300% … consumption of industries engaged in the manufacture of the utensils in the country. By Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter to be called the 1962 Act) duty of Customs shall be levied at such rates as may
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskUnion of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., Bombay
Supreme Court of India
Mar-08-1995
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14(1); Customs Valuation Rules, 1963 - Rule 8
1997(57)ECC179; 1995LC427(SC); 1995(76)ELT481(SC); 1995(2)SCALE153; 1995Supp(2)SCC372; [1995]2SCR595
in this appeal. M/s. Mahindra and Mahindra Limited, Bombay are the respondents. The matter herein arises under the Customs Act, 1962. The respondents filed Writ Petition No. 3167 of 1986 in the High Court of Bombay and assailed the … the question that 'the price is the sole consideration for the sale or the offer for sale' in Section 14(1)(a) of the Customs Act.Leave granted.2. We heard Sri Dipankar P. Gupta, Solicitor General who appeared for the appellants
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Godrej Industries Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Mumbai
Mar-22-2004
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14
2005(98)ECC25; 2004(171)ELT5(Bom)
levy penalty on the person in charge of the conveyance and their agents under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962 solely based on the outturn report given by the Bombay Port Trust. It was held that the ship … part as indicated above. However, there will be no order as per costs. Customs Act, 1962 - Section 14--Assessment--Bulk Liquid Cargo--Bill of entry--Ullage report cannot be only basis for assessing the Bulk liquid Cargo discharged directly into
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskCommissioner of Customs Vs. Ferodo India Pvt. Ltd.
Supreme Court of India
Feb-21-2008
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14, 14(1) and 14(1A); Income Tax Act, 1961; Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 - Rule 3, 4, 4(1), 4(3), 5, 6, 6A, 7, 7A, 8, 9, 9(1), 9(2) and 9(4)
2008(125)ECC297; 2008(151)LC297(SC); 2008(224)ELT23(SC); JT2008(3)SC15; 2008(3)SCALE153; (2008)4SCC563; 2008AIRSCW1633; 2008(4)SCC563; JT2008(3)SC15; [2008] 3 SCR 147
the imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c) or in the alternative under Rule 9(1)(e).5. Under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962, the assessable value of imported goods is deemed to be the price at which such or like goods
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSatellite Engineering Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others
Mumbai
Aug-31-1983
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14, 111, 111(1), 112, 117 and 128
1984(3)ECC217; 1983(14)ELT2177(Bom); [1983]141ITR399A(Bom)
Matched in: Citation 1984(3)ECC217; 1983(14)ELT2177(Bom); [1983]141ITR399A(Bom)
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskUnion of India and ors. Vs. Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd.
Mumbai
Jan-15-1979
Customs
Central Excise Act: ; Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14 and 14(1)
1980CENCUS203D; 1984(17)ELT284(Bom)
have to guard the revenue and assess any imported article on the basis of Section 14(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the instructions issued by the Government of India in that behalf. It is also a part of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskThe Commissioner of Customs, Chennai Vs. M/S Yeses International
Supreme Court of India
Oct-08-2001
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14, 14(1), 14(1A), 47 and 156; Customs Valuation (Department of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 - Rule 9(2)
AIR2001SC4026; 2001(78)ECC10; 2000LC9(SC); 2001(133)ELT526(SC); JT2001(8)SC317; 2001(7)SCALE33; (2001)9SCC535
controversy in this appeal is about the assessable value of the imported goods under Section 14 of the Customs Act 1962. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs assessed the value of the basis of final invoices raised by Indian Oil
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskVikrant Tyres Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Chennai
Aug-27-1999
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14, 14(1A), 27, 38(3) and 42B(1); Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; Customs Valuation (determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules - Rule 9(2)
2000(68)ECC60; 2000(115)ELT306(Mad)
that view needs correction by this Court.3. The duty is charged and assessed under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the value of the imported goods. Rule 9(2) as it stood in 1988 was as under:-'9 (2).
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskPremabhai Chhibabhai Tangal Vs. Union of India
Mumbai
Jun-17-1987
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 14(1), 111 and 112; Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 4
1994(70)ELT515(Bom)
asked to explain as to why penal action be not taken against him under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the goods be not confiscated under Section 111 of the Act. … of holding that the price shown in the invoice was undervalued. Therefore, the assessment should have been under Section 14(1)(a) and there is no reason as to why the price prevalent at the time and place of importation
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »