Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ANITA SUMANTH, MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
Great Eastern Shipping Company Ltd., Rep. By its Company Secretary – Mr. Jayesh Trivedi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Through Joint Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's factual background on vessel imports. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. analysis of customs duty implications based on vessel import dates. (Para 7 , 8 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. respondents' demand letter is deemed a formal demand. (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER :
ANITA SUMANTH, J.
Mr. Karthik, learned counsel, makes an endorsement not pressing the relief sought in W.P.No. 19300 of 2012, recording which, W.P.No.19300 of 2012 is dismissed as not pressed, leaving the question to be decided in any other appropriate case.
2. Now coming to W.P.Nos. 19298 & 19299 of 2012, the relief sought for is a certiorarified mandamus challenging communication dated 11.07.2012 in respect of two vessels i.e., ‘Jug Rahul’ and ‘Jug Rishi’ for non-payment of countervailing duty (CVD) on conversion from foreign to coastal run.
3.The impugned communications refer primarily, to Notification No. 12/2012 where Serial No. 462 stipulates that goods under tariff heading 8901 (foreign going vessels), are exempt from basic customs duty (BCD) and CVD, subject to the condition that appropriate duty is remitted upon conversion to coastal run.
4. ‘Jug Rahul’ has been imported in 2005. No Bill of Entry has been fil
Customs duty is only applicable at the time of first entry into India, and not on subsequent conversions, as retrospective application of exemptions violates established legal principles.
Levy of customs duty - Vessel - Where the vessels had been imported long before notification that was sought to be applied in those cases, and particularly at a time when there was no requirement to ....
Entitlement to abatement of customs duty requires timely claim submission and compliance with valuation procedures under the Customs Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exemption notification must be strictly construed and defined according to legislative intendment.
Temporary movement of goods for servicing does not constitute 'supply' under GST; re-import exemption applies.
The exporter/appellant’s fault here is that it did not file the requisite declaration. In all other respects, i.e. as to whether they conform to the description in the shipping documents and the valu....
The court declared Section 25(4) of the Customs Act unconstitutional, asserting that notification increases in duty require proper publication to inform the public adequately.
The effective date of a notification under Section 25(4) of the Customs Act is the date of its publication in the Official Gazette in e-mode.
The court emphasized the importance of demonstrating bona fides and eagerness to comply with the law in cases involving late filing of import documents, and held that the satisfaction for sufficiency....
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
