CESTAT Weekly Round-Up

This weekly round-up analytically summarises the key stories of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) reported at taxscan.in during the previous week from December 04 to December 10, 2022.

Atul Dhawan vs Commissioner of Customs - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 684

The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that placing order with importers does not constitute import and quashed the Show Cause Notice (SCN) and penalty imposed. The single bench of the Anil Choudhary, Judicial Member allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and held that the seizure is bad under Section 110 of the Customs Act which deals with “Seizure of goods, documents and things” and also found that the show cause notice given by the department is vague because it did not specify particular clauses under which confiscation is proposed in accordance with the Section 111 of the customs act.

Euro International vs Commissioner, Customs - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 685

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi Bench upheld the penalty on the ground of unauthorized modification in shipping bills.

“I further find that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of confiscation being set aside, the penalty under Section 114(iii) is also set aside, as this penalty is not imposable in absence of confiscation”, the Tribunal noted.

Jay Dan Gigev Welding Works vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 686

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad Bench has held that the manufacture of power driven pumps without BIS specification and ISI certificate are not eligible for SSI exemption. The tribunal also referred to Borana Pumps vs. Commissioner of CGST & C.Ex and Super Pumps Pvt. Limited vs. CCE where similar decisions were observed. The tribunal further held that the appellant therefore was entitled for the extension of cum-duty price benefit.

M/s Ayyan Energy Resources (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner, Customs - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 687

The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), confirmed confiscation of Low Sulphur Waxy Residue being hazardous waste. The Coram consisting of Justice Dilip Gupta, President and P V Subba Rao, Technical Member also observed that “The imported good, declared as low sulphur wax residue fuel oilwas on testing, found to be waste oil. Import of waste oil is prohibited under the Rules. The appellant had no licence or permission to import and process waste oil.”

Virgo Suitings Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 688

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the rejection of refund of the amount paid through DEPB scrip is not valid in absence of evidence. It was observed that the Revenue has failed to establish through any kind of documents or case laws that debit of any amount under the DEPB scheme is not a mode of payment of duty, therefore the benefit cannot be denied to the appellant.

NAVYUG SHIP BREAKING CO vs C.C., JAMNAGAR - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 689

In a recent case, the department in its order failed to mention the duty to oil contained in the Bunker Tank,the Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the non-speaking order of the Commissioner. The CESTAT bench of Ramesh Nair, member (judicial) and Raju, member (technical)  observed that if the tanks containing Oils are connected to the pipeline with the engine or machinery of the vessel, there may be no reason why the same cannot be treated as an integral part of the engine or machinery of the vessel.

M/s. Sequoia Capital India Advisors Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 690

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)has held that the CENVAT credit refund can’t be denied for judicial scrutiny. While allowing the appeal, the CESTAT bench held that “as per the statutory mandates read with clarification furnished by TRU, rejection of refund benefit by the authorities below cannot be sustained for judicial scrutiny and set aside the impugned order.”

M/s Surya Jyoti Global Logistics vs Commissioner of Customs - 2022 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 691

The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) recently held that Customs Brokers are not obliged to verify correctness of documents as per the Regulation 10(n). The Tribunal of Justice Dilip Gupta and Technical Member P V Subba Rao observed that, “The Customs broker is not required to obtain any “Recommendation” or a certificate from any officer that the exporter is “bonafide”.”

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates