Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.21 seconds)Section 140 in The Customs Act, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in The Customs Act, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 110A in The Customs Act, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 114A in The Customs Act, 1962 [Entire Act]
Cce, Panchkula vs Ballarpur Industries Ltd on 26 July, 2016
d) The Respondent has travelled beyond the scope of SCN. The
Show Cause Notice did not contain any allegation whatsoever that
the appellant had fabricated or forged any documents or
knowingly submitted such documents before the Customs
authorities. There was no averment, reference, or suggestion
that the appellant had prepared, altered, or caused to be
prepared any false or fabricated document. That the learned
adjudicating authority without any foundation that the appellant
4
was involved in the fabrication of documents in para 72 of
impugned order amounts to travelling beyond the scope of the
SCN and importing a new and serious charge without affording
the appellant an opportunity to rebut the same. Reliance is
placed on the decision in CCE v Ballarpur Industries Ltd.-2007
(215) ELT 489 (SC); CCE v. Toyo Engineering India Ltd.-
2006 (201) ELT 513 (SC).
Commissioner Of Customs, Mumbai vs M/S. Toyo Engineering India Limited on 31 August, 2006
d) The Respondent has travelled beyond the scope of SCN. The
Show Cause Notice did not contain any allegation whatsoever that
the appellant had fabricated or forged any documents or
knowingly submitted such documents before the Customs
authorities. There was no averment, reference, or suggestion
that the appellant had prepared, altered, or caused to be
prepared any false or fabricated document. That the learned
adjudicating authority without any foundation that the appellant
4
was involved in the fabrication of documents in para 72 of
impugned order amounts to travelling beyond the scope of the
SCN and importing a new and serious charge without affording
the appellant an opportunity to rebut the same. Reliance is
placed on the decision in CCE v Ballarpur Industries Ltd.-2007
(215) ELT 489 (SC); CCE v. Toyo Engineering India Ltd.-
2006 (201) ELT 513 (SC).
The Customs Act, 1962
S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Neeta Bhalla And Anr on 20 September, 2005
f) that Section 114AA has been invoked without complying with
Section 140 of the Customs Act. Section 140 of the Customs Act,
1962 is pari materia with Section 141 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881, as interpreted by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in SMS Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Neeta Bhalla, (2005) 8 SCC