SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 45

CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Dilip Gupta, President, P.V. Subba Rao, Technical Member
M/s. Yash Oro India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Customs ACC (Import) – Respondent
CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 50911 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Kishore Kunal, Ms. Runjhun Pare, Shri Govind Gupta
For the Respondents: Shri Ranjan Prakash, Shri Nikhil Mohan Goyal

The court ruled that customs authorities could not disregard a valid Import License issued by DGFT, allowing the simultaneous benefit of multiple exemption notifications.

Headnote:(A) Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 28(1), 28AA, 111(d), 112(a) - Customs duty demand and penalty imposed on importer for wrongly availing exemption under Notification No. 96/2008-Cus when conditions of Import License mandated compliance with Notification No. 12/2012-Cus - Revenue’s claim of short levy sustained despite license being valid not binding without DGFT sanction - Court finds notification restrictions not applicable in this context. (Paras 11, 30)

(B) Import License - Validity and conditions - Customs authorities cannot dispute legitimacy of an Import License issued by DGFT unless it is canceled - Interpretation of import conditions must align with foreign trade policies. (Paras 26, 30)

Facts of the case:
Appeal against customs duty confirmation and penalties imposed for importing gold doré bars under an exemption notification when the Import License indicated compliance with a different notification was contested. Court examined if the customs duty claim constituted a violation of license terms.

Findings of Court:
Customs duty demand and penalties could not be upheld as the DGFT had not invalidated the import license, allowing exemption claims not contradicting the contract's terms.

Issues: Whether the appellant could claim the 2008 Exemption Notification benefits when the Import License mandated the 2012 Notification compliance was critically determined.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the conditions of the Import License did not preclude the appellant from simultaneously availing benefits from both notifications, emphasizing that the customs authority lacked jurisdiction to challenge a valid DGFT license.

Result: Appeal allowed.

Table of Content
1. duty demand confirmed by customs authority. (Para 1 , 2)
2. background on exemption notifications. (Para 3 , 4 , 6)
3. arguments from both appellant and respondent. (Para 10 , 13)
4. interpretation of license conditions and duties. (Para 15 , 17 , 18)
5. court's final view on appeal. (Para 30 , 31)

JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA:

This appeal seeks to assail the order dated 23.12.2024 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs ACC (Import), New Customs House, New Delhi that confirms the customs duty on M/s. Yash Oro India Private Limited, the appellant in respect of goods imported with interest under section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962 , the Customs Act and penalty under section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act. Redemption fine has also been imposed in lieu of confiscation under section 125 of the Customs Act.

2. The issue that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is justified in availing exemption of customs duty under Notification No. 96/2008-Cus dated 13.08.2008, the 2008 Exemption Notification on import of gold dore bars from Tanzania in terms of the Import License dated 22.12.2020 issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade, DGFT permitting imports subject to Notification No. 12/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012, the 2012 Notification

3. In the Doha Ministerial Order of the World Trade Conference held in 2001, the member countries, including India, committed to consider providing duty free, quota free market access for Least Developed Countries products and to consider additional measures to improve market excess to such countries. In the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration held in 2005, the World Trade Organisation countries agreed to provide duty free and quota free market access on a lasting basis on all products originating from Least Developed Countries. The Government of India, in 2008, extended duty free tariff preference scheme for the Least Developed Countries.

4. Accordingly, the 2008 Exemption Notification was issued on 13.08.2008 in exercise of the powers conferred by section 25(1) of the Customs Act. It exempted goods falling under the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, other than those specified in Appendix I and Appendix II, from the whole of duty of customs as specified in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act and from the whole of Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess, AIDC leviable under section 124 of the Finance Act, 2021, the 2021 Finance Act when imported to India from a country listed in the Schedule to the Notification.

5. On 17.03.2012, the 2012 Notification was issued extending benefits of concessional rate of basic customs duty as well as additional duty to certain goods, including gold dore bars at Serial No. 318 having gold content not exceeding 95% subject to Condition No’s 5 and 34. Condition No’s 5 and 34 are reproduced below:

6. Customs Notification No. 50/2017,the 2017 Notification was issued on 30.06.2017 superseding the 2012 Notification. This Notification extended benefit of concessional rate of basic customs duty to gold dore bars under Serial No. 354 subject to two Conditions at Serial No’s. 9 and 40 which are identical to Condition No’s 5 and 34 of the 2012 Notification.

7. On 22.12.2020, the DGFT issued Import License to the appellant permitting the appellant to import gold dore bars with purity upto 95%.

The Conditions contained in the License are as follows:

2. CONDITION SHEET

8. The appellant filed a Bill of Entry for import of gold dore bars from Tanzania and claimed exemption of duty under the 2008 Exemption Notification. The appellant also filed the country of origin certificate. Investigation was carried out and it was revealed that the appellant had wrongly claimed exemption under the 2008 Exemption Notification since the Condition of the Import License issued by the DGFT specifically mentioned that the goods shall be cleared under the 2012 Notification later superseded by the 2017 Notification.

9. However, a show cause not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top