Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreExplore past issues of BCA Journal & indulge in a treasure trove of high-quality professional content across format of print, videos & learning events from the BCAS stable.
Learn More
I. HIGH COURT
27 Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd vs. UOI [2022] 144 taxmann.com 200 (Bombay) Date of order: 15th September, 2022
The charging sections for the imposition of CVD and SAD or surcharge are section 90(1) of the Finance Act, 2000, section 3(1) and section 3A(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, respectively and not section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court held that section 3(6) and section 3A(4) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 do not provide for any interest or penalty. Neither does section 90 of the Finance Act, 2000 provide for the same. Therefore, no interest or penalty can be levied on the portion of payment pertaining to a surcharge, CVD and SAD.
FACTS
The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of vehicles in India and filed four applications before the settlement commission against four show cause notices demanding differential customs duty. The Orders passed by the Settlement Commission were challenged before the High Court. The High Court quashed these orders and directed to pass fresh orders. The respondents re-heard the matter and passed the orders confirming the earlier orders and imposing interest and penalties.
The petitioner contende
