Back
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Dilip Gupta, President, C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical)
M/s. Kapoor Watch Co. Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conflicts over penalties imposed on directors. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. details of customs seizure and initial findings. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. show cause notice specifics regarding limited watches. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. appellant's arguments about procedural errors. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. court's observations on the legal burden of proof. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. legal standards for smuggling allegations. (Para 23 , 30 , 39 , 42) |
| 7. analysis of evidence related to seizures. (Para 24 , 28 , 33 , 46) |
| 8. final verdict on the appeals. (Para 47) |
JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA:
Customs Appeal No. 50706 of 2020 has been filed by M/s. Kapoor Watch Co. Pvt. Ltd., the appellant to assail that portion of the order dated 12.12.2019 passed by the Principal Commissioner (Preventive), New Customs House, New Delhi, the Principal Commissioner that confiscates 837 watches under section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 , the Customs Act with option to release the same on payment of redemption fine; confirms the customs duty under section 28(4) of the Customs Act; and imposes a penalty upon the appellant under section 114A of the Customs Act.
2. Customs Appeal No. 50707 of 2020 has
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
