Back
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Dilip Gupta, President, Hemambika R. Priya, Member (Technical)
Aditya Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute over mis-declaration and undervaluation of imported furniture. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. section 138b requires witness examination for statement relevancy. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. mandatory procedure under 138b/9d; retracted statements inadmissible. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. section 138c demands certificate for computer printouts admissibility. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. non-compliance with 138b/138c invalidates reliance on evidence. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. impugned order set aside; appeals allowed. (Para 20) |
JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA:
All these three appeals seek quashing of the order dated March 10, 2023 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, ICD-TKD, New Delhi, the Principal Commissioner that adjudicates the show cause notice dated November 01, 2019. The Principal Commissioner has imposed penalties upon all the three appellants under section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, the Customs Act
2. The dispute is in respect of the Bills of Entry that were filed relating to furniture and furniture parts that were imported. The allegation of mis- declaration and undervaluation of furniture and furniture parts is based on various statements of the supplier, customs b
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
