Exercise of option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation is not mandatory in the case of goods, the importation of which is prohibited under the Act or any other law for the time being in force. If there are restrictions in importing certain goods and if the conditions for importing have not been complied with, it definitely amounts to a prohibition under the relevant statutes. – Mohammed Fazil V Deputy Commissioner of Customs (ACC), Cochin - 2017 349 E.L.T. 75 Ker.
Confiscation of goods for non-declaration of MRP sustainable – Sun Exports V Commissioner of Customs (Airport), Chennai - 2017 349 E.L.T. 258 Mad.
Capital goods credit availed and simultaneous depreciation claimed under Income Tax on the said amount which was reversed in the subsequent returns filed. Matter remanded to examine the income tax returns and accordingly extend the benefit if if it was reversed. – Cassel Research Laboratories PVT Ltd V CESTAT - 2017 TIOL 762 HC MAD CX.
Merely because the co-accused had pleaded guilty and accepted punishment in criminal proceedings, would not make the other person also be liable for charges of Sec.112(a) & (b) of CA - D.V.Kishore V CC – 2017-TIOL-883-HC-MAD-CUS.
Security Services provided by State Police – In view of precedent decisions of Tribunal in favour of appellant and fact that they are a Dept. of State Govt., pre-deposit of mandatory 10% dispensed with and Tribunal directed to hear the appeal on merits – Superintendent of Police V CCC, CE & ST 2017 (50) STR 7 (MP).
Clarificatory provisions can operate with retrospective effect. Explanation would have to be read as a whole irrespective of profit motive and so long as such service is rendered for consideration, it falls within the purview of the tax – Chanakya Mandal V UOI - 2017-TIOL-855-HC-MUM-ST.
It is settled legal position that the right to cross examine sought or to have opportunity to effectively exercise that right is an essential part of principle of natural justice – Savino Micron India Pvt Ltd V UOI - 2017-TIOL-878-HC-AHM-CX.
Prosecution of petitioner is not sustainable when the order on charge of evasion of duty and penalty has been set aside. – Saf Yeast Co. Ltd V UOI - 2017 (348) ELT 621 (ALL).
Once it is found that a person is entitled to the benefit of the Exemption Notification, the interpretation of the clauses containing the procedural aspects may have to be liberal – Maheswari Industries V CCE 2017-TIOL-880-HC-AP-CX.