Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.70 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Sree Ayyanar Spinning Mills & vs Cce, Tuticorin on 21 January, 2015

Nitin Gandhi vs New Delhi(Icd Tkd) on 17 March, 2023

o M/s. Sree Ayyanar Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin, 2019 (7) TMI 1305- CESTAT Chennai o Premax logistics vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai- II, 2017 (4) TMI 483- CESTAT Chennai  Penalty under Section 112(a) is imposable where the person has conducted any act or omits to do any act or omission which renders the goods liable for confiscation. In the present case, the allegation against the Appellant do not establish the case of the department which shows act of omission or commission rendering goods liable for confiscation. Appellant acted in a bonafide manner to assist his employer Hemant Gandhi to import glass items in accordance with the customs provisions. Refer cases where penalty under S.112 set aside due to want of mens rea:-
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jindal Saw Limited vs -Commissioner Of Customs(Import) ... on 14 September, 2023

3. Learned Counsel did not agree with the report of M/s Intertek, the chartered engineer engaged by the customs authorities, as the survey was conducted at the premises of the appellant and the methodology adopted for valuation is absent and, even, was unclear about the year of manufacture. Reliance was placed by him on the decision of the Tribunal in Anish Kumar Spinning Mills v. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin [2004 (172) ELT 394 (Tri- Chennai)] upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gajra Bevel Gears v. Collector of Customs, Bombay [2000 (115) ELT 612 (SC)].
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Omega Packwell Private Limited vs C.C. Noida on 7 June, 2024

In this context, reliance is placed on the decision of the case of Sree Ayyanar Spinning & Weaving Mills vs. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin [2019 (370) E.L.T. 1681 (Tri.-Chennai)] and Ismail Ibrahim vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore [2019 (370) E.L.T. 1321 (Tri.-Bang.)]. Finally, the Ld. Counsel prayed to quash the impugned order being illegal and improper.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 39 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1