Advanced Search Results

Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta Vs. Indian Rayon and Industries Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 35L; Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 20; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rules 12(1), 13, 14 and 14A

Reported in : 2008(121)ECC1; 2008(157)LC1(SC); JT2008(8)SC426; 2008(10)SCALE498; 2008AIRSCW5954.

being aggrieved has filed the present appeal.9. Counsel for the parties have been heard.10. Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962, which deals with re-importation of the goods, provides:20. Re-importation of goods. - If goods were imported into India

Gaurav Distributors (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 20; Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 - Sections 3(1); ;Central Excise Rules - Rules 12 and 13

Reported in : 2004(95)ECC462; 2004(170)ELT513(SC); JT2004(6)SC312; 2004(6)SCALE574; (2004)7SCC187

been exported by SKF Bearing (I) Ltd. The Appellants claimed benefit of the proviso Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962, the relevant portion of which reads as follows: 'Section 20 Re-importation of goods:- If goods are imported into

Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2, 2(23), 20 and 130E; Central Excise Tariff Act; Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - Sections 3(1)

Reported in : 2008(129)ECC63; 2008(155)LC63(SC)

ORDER1. The present appeals have been filed by the assessee under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act') against the impugned final Order Nos. 79-89/2002-B dated 19.2.2002 passed by the Customs, Excise … dismissed by the order impugned before us. It has been held by the Tribunal that in view of Section 20 of the Act on the re-importation of goods, the duty leviable would be the same as would have

Tata Tea Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 20, 25(1) and 130E

Reported in : AIR2000SC376; 2000(67)ECC222; 1999(114)ELT775(SC); JT1999(9)SC281; 1999(7)SCALE202; (1999)9SCC522

dismissed. Aggrieved by the order of Tribunal, the appellant has filed these appeals under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962. The only question arising for decision is whether the appellant is entitled to benefit of Notification No. 13/81 … parties, we are of the opinion that the order of the Tribunal cannot be found fault with. Under Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962read with the definition of 'import' as given in Clause 23 of Section 2,

HussaIn Haji Harun Alias HusseIn Kabiju Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 129E; Appellate Tribunal Procedure Rules, 1982 - Rule 20; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR1988Guj218; [1989]66CompCas430(Guj); 1995(77)ELT803(Guj)

of the case. There will be no order as to costs. 10. Order accordingly. Customs - appeal - Section 129E of Customs Act, 1962, Rule 20 of Appellate Tribunal Procedure Rules, 1982 and Article 226 of Constitution … goods of foreign origin totally valued at Rs. 17,32,000/ should not be confiscated under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The concerned persons were also asked to show cause as to why the vessel MSV PIRANI MNV 192

Collector of Customs and Central Vs. Cotton Corporation of India and

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

Reported in : (1986)(25)ELT327TriDel

Subsequently, the Government of India issued a show cause notice dated 8-10-1982 under Section 131 (3) of the Customs Act, 1962. It was mentioned therein that the Central Government was tentatively of the view that ad hoc exemption order

Sriram Mills and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2(33), 3(2) and (3), 11, 12, 25(1), (2) and (3), 111, 112, 143(A) and 167(8); Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 - Sections 11 - Rule 9; Constitution of India - Article 226; Import and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 - Sections 2(E), 3(2), 4, 5, 9, 11, 14, 15 and 20; Foreigh Trade (Development and Regulation) Ordinance, 1992; Foreigh Trade (Regulation) Rules, 1993 - Rules 2 and 6(2); Sea Customs Act, 1878 - Sections 19, 167(8) and 168

Reported in : 1998(3)ALD441; 1998(4)ALT207; 1998(61)ECC456

as the respondents, it is necessary to refer to the legal position obtaining under the Act and the Customs Act, 1962 and the respective jurisdiction and powers of officers under both the acts; The field of import and export … regulation and developing the foreign trade. The Act repealed the Imports and Exports Control Act of 1947 by Section 20. The relevant sections under the Act are Sections 3, 4, 5, 9, 11, 14 and 15. Prior to

Sudhir Gulati Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 108; Constitution of India - Article 20(3)

Reported in : 72(1998)DLT371; 1998(45)DRJ49; 1998(100)ELT344(Del)

dated 30th April 1994 and 2nd May 1994 issued by Air Customs Superintendent under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 requiring the attendance of the petitioner in connection with the enquiry being made regarding export by M/s. Rancan … made regarding export by M/s. Rancan Impex. The petitioner contends that the said summons are vocative of Article 20 of the constitution of India.2. The facts emerging from the pleadings of the parties briefly are that an

Shri A.L. Jalaludeen @ Chellavappa Vs. the Deputy Director

Court : Chennai

Subject : FERA

Acts : Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Sections 9(1), 40, 52(6) and 71(2); Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1999 - Sections 20(2); Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 108; Income Tax Act; Evidence Act - Sections 24 and 106; Constitution of India - Article 21

Reported in : (2009)5MLJ1303

in that case, the Supreme Court held that the Collector ought to have resorted to Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 and call upon to summon the professor, whose attendance is necessary.10. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted … is invalid/non-est in law in view of the violation of Section 52(6) of the FERA 1973 r/w Section 20(2)(b) of the FERA 1999?2. The learned Counsel for the appellant did not advance any submission on question No.

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Standard Motor Products and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Limitation

Acts : Supreme Court Rules, 1966 - Order 20-A, Orders 6, 15, Rule 2(14); Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 - Sections 55, 51; Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 20-B, 130-E; Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 - Section 35-L

Reported in : [1989]178ITR220(SC)

Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 as well as under Order 20-B regarding appeals under Section 130-E of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 35-L of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. It appears that an application for condonation