Loading...
Login
Register with us
Submit your article
subscription
About us
Clients
Feedback
Contact us
SEARCH
Toggle navigation
home
SGST
Acts
Rules
Notification
Circular
Miscellaneous
Government Order
Public Notice
Format
UTGST
Acts
Supreme Court Cases
Rules
High Court Cases
Notification
Tribunal
Circular
Miscellaneous
Government Order
Public Notice
Format
CGST
Acts
Supreme Court Cases
Rules
High Court Cases
Notification
Tribunal Cases
Circular
Advance Ruling
Rate Schedule
Format
IGST
Acts
Supreme Court Cases
Rules
High Court Cases
Notification
Tribunal Cases
Circular
Advance Ruling
Format
vat
Acts
Supreme Court Cases
Rules
High Court Cases
Notification
Tribunal
Circular
Miscellaneous
Schedules
Government Order
Public Notice
service tax
Acts
Supreme Court Cases
Rules
High Court Cases
Notification
CESTAT Cases
Circular
Advance Ruling Authority
excise
Acts
Supreme Court Cases
Rules
High Court Cases
Notification
CESTAT Cases
Circular
Advance Ruling Authority
Central Excise Tariff
customs
Acts
Supreme Court Case
Rules
Notification
High Court Case
Circular
CESTAT Case
Custom Tariff
Advance Ruling Authority
DGFT
Act
Rules
Policy
Procedure
Notification
Public Notice
Trade Notice
Policy Circular
GST Caselaws
Supreme Court Cases
High Court Cases
Tribunal
AAR
NAA Order
Select your search
Select One
Case Law Quick Search
Case Law Advance Search
Notification/Circular Search
Notification/Circular Advance Search
2019-VIL-93-CESTAT-DEL-CU
Home
2019-VIL-93-CESTAT-DEL-CU
CUSTOMS
CESTAT Case
Customs – appeal against confirmation of cost recovery charge - The Adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand under the provision of Regulation 5(2) and 6(1)(o) of Handling of Cargo in Custom Area Regulation, 2009. However, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand without invoking any of those regulation – HELD - Regulation 6(1)(o) of the Regulation (6) is not meant for recovery of default payment - the ld. Adjudicating authority has not appreciated the legal provision as contained in HCR, which do not indicate the machinery for realisation of cost recovery charge on account of being defaulted - the order passed by the ld. Adjudicating authority is beyond the scope of the provisions of HCCAR, 2009 more so when he has decided not to cancel the licence of the appellant and only imposed penalty - the provisions of Regulation 5(2) of HCCAR is clear and unambiguous that the cost recovery charge is not required to be paid when the same is specifically exempted by the order of Government of India and Ministry of Finance. It is on record that in the case of appellant Ministry has exempted cost recovery charge – thus, the appellant is duly entitled for the benefit of cost recovery charge for the subsequent years in terms of the new regulation also under provisions of the HCCAR, 2009 - the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed
Download File
show more Judgements
Articles
VIEW ALL
GST: Tax implications on Solar projects
by CA Suman Mundra & CA Pooja Jajwani
Analysis of the provisions of Interest on late payment of GST
by CA O.P. Agarwalla
Standard Operating Procedure on TDS (Updated as on 18th February 2019)
Features
VIEW ALL
Constitution of Committee of Officers (CoO) on use of RFID data for strengthening of e-way bill System under GST
The Finance Act, 2019
CBIC - GST Newsletter - Making Sense of the GST Data
Create Account
Male
Female
New Code?
Log In
New User ?
Forgot Password ?
Forgot Password
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.
Email this page
×
Error !
This is
Member Area
- Please
Login
to view this page.