{"id":273909,"date":"2022-09-17T12:00:38","date_gmt":"2022-09-17T06:30:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=273909"},"modified":"2022-09-17T12:00:38","modified_gmt":"2022-09-17T06:30:38","slug":"does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/","title":{"rendered":"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\n

Bombay High Court<\/b>: In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) (\u2018appellant\u2019) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai (CESTAT), directing provisional release of the seized goods in the shape of iPhones in purported exercise of powers under Section 110-A<\/a> of Customs Act, 1962<\/a>, a Division Bench of Dhiraj Singh Thakur<\/b> and Abhay Ahuja JJ. set aside the impugned order as Dinesh Bhabootmal Salecha (\u2018respondent\u2019) seeking release of the seized goods, was found to be an \u2018importer\u2019 and not \u2018owner\u2019<\/b> of the goods. The clear mandate of Section 110-A<\/a> Customs Act, 1962<\/a> states that goods could be permitted to be released only in favour of an owner<\/b> and the respondent failed to establish his ownership over the seized goods during the proceedings.<\/p>\n

Based upon an intelligence input, the consignment (under challenge) was supposed to contain Memory Module of 4GB, 8GB and 32GB D-RAM valuing Rs. 80 Lakhs approximately, but on inspection was found to contain 3800 iPhones valuing approximately Rs. 42 Crores. Since the goods were mis-declared, the goods were seized under Section 110-A<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

An application under Section 110-A<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a> was filed which was rejected by the adjudicating authority due to lack of evidence regarding ownership by Salecha Electronics Inc\/Dinesh Bhabootmal Salecha. Assailing this, an appeal was preferred before CESTAT which was thereby allowed. and provisional release of the goods were directed. The Tribunal held that even when an \u2018owner\u2019 had not been defined in the Customs Act yet, the term \u2018owner\u2019 was deployed in the definition of an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 2(26)<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a> and by default, ownership could be claimed by an \u2018importer\u2019.<\/b><\/p>\n

On the contention of the respondent that the authorities had considered the Respondent to be an owner because the show cause notice was issued to him in terms of Section 124<\/a> Customs Act<\/a>, the Court noted that on a perusal of Section 124<\/a> Customs Act<\/a>, it can be seen that issuance of a show cause notice in terms of Section 124 does not necessarily establish that the person in whose name it is issued, is necessarily the owner.<\/p>\n

The Court further noted that on a careful reading of Section 110-A<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a>, it is abundantly clear that goods seized may be released to the owner. The said section does not include or envisage release of goods provisionally in favor of an \u2018importer\u2019 of goods much less does it envisage, a release in favor of \u2018any person\u2019, in addition to the \u2018owner\u2019 as mentioned in Section 124<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a>, who has been served a notice under the said section.<\/b><\/p>\n

The Court held that the Tribunal has committed an error in importing the definition of an \u2018importer\u2019 as defined under Section 2(26)<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a> and reading the same in Section 110-A<\/a> of Customs Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dinesh Bhabootmal Salecha, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1808<\/a>, decided on 08-09-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Mr. Advait Sethna a\/w Mr. Rangan Majumdar i\/b Ms. Ruju Thakker, Advocates, for the Appellant;<\/p>\n

Mr. Prakash Shah a\/w Mr. Jas Sanghavi i\/b PDS Legal, Advocates, for the Respondent.<\/p>\n

\n

*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Nothing could prevent the legislature from specifically incorporating a provision in Section 110-A Customs Act, 1962 to also entitle, besides an owner, an importer, a beneficial owner or any person holding himself to be an importer to claim a right to seek provisional release of goods in terms of Section 110-A of Customs Act, 1962<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":261881,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2518,6651,35786,12111,35785,51762,51763,51764,7861,51765,51766,12121],"class_list":["post-273909","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-cestat","tag-confiscation","tag-customs-act","tag-customs-department","tag-importer","tag-inspection-of-goods","tag-iphones","tag-owner","tag-ownership-of-seized-goods","tag-provisional-release","tag-seizure-of-goods"],"yoast_head":"\nDoes seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-09-17T06:30:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/\",\"name\":\"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-09-17T06:30:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses | SCC Times","description":"In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses","og_description":"In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-09-17T06:30:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/","name":"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2022-09-17T06:30:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"In an appeal filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import) challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/17\/does-seized-goods-may-be-released-in-favor-of-an-owner-or-an-importer-under-section-110-a-customs-act-bombay-high-court-analyses\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Does seized goods may be released in favor of an \u2018owner\u2019 or an \u2018importer\u2019 under Section 110-A Customs Act? Bombay High Court analyses"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":93111,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/17\/notice-to-be-given-within-six-months-for-goods-seized-under-customs-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":273909,"position":0},"title":"Notice to be given within six months for goods seized under Customs Act","author":"Saba","date":"December 17, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: While allowing a petition seeking return of a bracelet seized by the Custom Officers, the Single Bench of Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. held that where goods are seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 and no notice thereof is given under Section 124(a) within six months\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":215266,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/01\/guj-hc-goods-seized-by-customs-authority-can-be-released-after-imposing-fine-and-subjecting-the-party-concerned-to-certain-conditions\/","url_meta":{"origin":273909,"position":1},"title":"Guj HC | Goods seized by Customs Authority can be released after imposing fine and subjecting the party concerned to certain conditions","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 1, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Gujarat High Court:\u00a0 A Division Bench of Harsha Devani and Bhargav D. Karia, JJ. partially allowed a stay order for the release of diamonds confiscated by the Customs Department after imposing fine and some subsequent conditions.\u00a0 Custom Department seized rough diamonds valued at Rs 1,05,58,474 from the respondent herein for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243734,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/12\/cestat-penalty-imposed-under-s-112-read-with-s-114aa-of-the-customs-act-1962-set-aside-tribunal-allows-appeal-stating-absence-of-mens-rea\/","url_meta":{"origin":273909,"position":2},"title":"CESTAT | Penalty imposed under S. 112 read with S. 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 set aside; Tribunal allows appeal stating absence of mens rea","author":"Editor","date":"February 12, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the impugned order wherein the penalty of Rs 50,000 had been imposed under Section 112 read with Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant was a customs broker and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243609,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/09\/cestat-condition-of-bank-guarantee-found-exorbitant-tribunal-allows-appeal-reducing-amount-of-the-bank-guarantee\/","url_meta":{"origin":273909,"position":3},"title":"CESTAT | Condition of bank guarantee found exorbitant; Tribunal allows appeal reducing amount of the bank guarantee","author":"Editor","date":"February 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against Order passed by the Commissioner of Customs whereby; the appellant\u2019s imported seized goods had been provisionally released subject to the execution of bond for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366778,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/15\/not-liable-to-pay-redemption-fine-customs-delays-show-cause-notice-del-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":273909,"position":4},"title":"Delayed Show Cause notice by Customs — Is the Owner of goods still liable for redemption fine, penalty or interest? Delhi HC answers","author":"Editor","date":"November 15, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court considered how the timing of a Show Cause Notice by Customs Department impacts the owner\u2019s liability.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Customs delays show cause notice","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Customs-delays-show-cause-notice.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Customs-delays-show-cause-notice.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Customs-delays-show-cause-notice.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Customs-delays-show-cause-notice.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":235860,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/16\/cestat-%e2%94%82-employee-not-liable-for-the-actions-of-the-senior-while-following-instructions-tribunal-allows-appeal-and-sets-aside-penalty-under-s-112-a-of-customs-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":273909,"position":5},"title":"CESTAT | Employee not liable for the actions of the senior while following instructions; Tribunal allows appeal and sets aside penalty under S. 112 (a) of Customs Act","author":"Editor","date":"September 16, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): A Division Bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and C.L. Mahar (Technical Member), allowed an appeal filed by the appellant who was an employee, \"H\u201f Cardholder working with Customs House Agent -- Commercial Clearing Agencies Pvt. Limited, at the relevant time. In\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/273909","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=273909"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/273909\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/261881"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=273909"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=273909"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=273909"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}