Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Customs Act

41 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

TEKCHANDversusCOMPETENT AUTHORITY

1993 INSC 13331 March 1993Dismissed

Tekchand, a watch dealer, and his two sons made a voluntary disclosure of income under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Act, 1976 and obtained a certificate. After serving a detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA), they were served no

HEMLATA KANTILAL SHAHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1981 INSC 18630 October 1981Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the preventive detention of Kantilal Nagar Das Shah under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 after customs seized 141 slabs of palladium he had smuggled from Muscat. The wife argued that the detenu was denied legal representation before the A

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), MUMBAIversusM/S. DILIP KUMAR AND COMPANY & ORS.

2018 INSC 64630 July 2018Reference answered

The case concerned the interpretation of Customs Notification No. 20/1999, under which the respondents claimed a concessional customs duty rate for imported vitamin E50 feed powder. The Customs department denied the benefit, classifying the goods under a higher duty heading, leading to a series of appeals up to the Sup

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusKAPUR CHAND KESARIMAL JAIN

1981 INSC 2030 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was convicted under Section 135 of the Customs Act and the Defence of India Rules for smuggling 2015 tolas of contraband gold, receiving rigorous imprisonment and fines. On remand, the Bombay High Court granted him the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, citing confiscation of the gol

M/S COMMERCE INTERNATIONALversusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

1995 INSC 23029 March 1995Dismissed

Mis Commerce International imported 125 cartons of toners and declared their value based on an invoice and a certificate of origin. The Customs Department asked the importer to produce a price list, but the importer refused, citing the trading company's confidentiality. Customs obtained a price list from the manufactur

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BANGALOREversusSRIKUMAR AGENCIES ETC. ETC.

2008 INSC 135527 November 2008Disposed off

The Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore filed appeals challenging several orders of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) that had disposed of cases by merely relying on earlier judgments without a detailed examination of the facts. The central issue was whether the printing on packagi

D. RAMAKRISHNANversusINTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU

2009 INSC 95027 July 2009Dismissed

The appellant (Accused No.2) and his co‑accused were convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 for unauthorised export of alprazolam, lorazepam and nitrazepam, drugs listed in the Schedule of the Act. The appellant contended that the alleged offence should be dealt with under the D

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusOSWAL WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 7027 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged an ex parte interim stay order and a contempt rule granted by the Calcutta High Court in a writ petition filed by Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. seeking to restrain the Union from enforcing a clause‑8B order under the Import Control Order, 1955, and to permit re‑export of a consignment of beef t

CHAMPALAL POONAJI SHAHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1982 INSC 727 January 1982Dismissed

The petitioner was convicted by a Presidency Magistrate for offences under IPC 120B, the Customs Act and related rules and sentenced to imprisonment of two to four years with a fine. The High Court set aside the conviction, but the Supreme Court restored it. The petitioner had earlier been preventively detained under t

GENERAL INSTRUMENTS COMPANYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 96725 August 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a partnership firm, was awarded a government contract and obtained a Special Imprest Licence (SIL) to import raw materials duty‑free, subject to a bond and an export obligation. After fulfilling the export obligation, the licensing authority issued a forfeiture order, enforced a bond and denied cash comp

UNION OF INDIAversusPALIWAL ELECTRICALS (P) LTD. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 43825 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed a decision of the Allahabad High Court that struck down paragraph 7 of Central Excise Notification No. 175 of 1986, which excluded from exemption any small‑scale manufacturer that affixed the brand or trade name of a person not eligible for the exemption. The Court examined whether this amen

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JAIPURversusPRAKASH CHAND LUNIA (D) THR. LRS. & ANR.

2023 INSC 41624 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The assessee, Prakash Chand Lunia, who dealt in silver, was found to have smuggled 146 slabs of silver which were confiscated by customs and a penalty imposed. He claimed the value of the confiscated silver as a business loss under Section 37(1) of the Income‑Tax Act, relying on the High Court's application of the Piar

SUNILA JAINversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 10524 February 2006Dismissed

Sunila Jain appealed against a preventive detention order issued under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA) against her husband, D.K. Jain, who had been released on bail by the Special Court of Economic Offences on the ground that the alleged offence was bailable. T

T.A. ABDUL RAHMANversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

1989 INSC 25423 August 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, brother of T.A. Sirajudeen, challenged his sibling's preventive detention under sections 3(1)(iii) and 3(1)(iv) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). The detenu had been caught with smuggled gold biscuits in November‑December 1986, but the de

OM SHANKAR BIYANIversusBOARD OF TRUSTEES, PORT OF CALCUTTA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 9722 February 2002Disposed off

The appellant imported a consignment of bearings and, after customs seized the goods, sought to clear them without paying the port charges and demurrage claimed by the Board of Trustees of the Port of Calcutta. The High Court allowed removal of the goods without payment, but the Board exercised its statutory lien under

MOHAN LAL SHAMLAL SONIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

1991 INSC 6722 February 1991Dismissed

The appellant's premises were raided by Customs officials, leading to the seizure of gold, silver, and cash and the filing of two criminal complaints under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Gold Control Act, 1968. After the trial magistrate closed evidence, the prosecution sought, under Section 540 of the old Code (now Sec

FRICK INDIA LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1989 INSC 39421 December 1989Dismissed

Frick India Ltd., a licensed manufacturer of air‑conditioning and refrigeration equipment, cleared cooling coils, condensers and compressors for cold‑storage and ice‑factory plants and paid excise duty under Tariff Item 29A(3). The company claimed a refund, arguing that these parts were not excisable under sub‑item (3)

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusPK. SHAMSUDEEN

1992 INSC 17921 July 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu issued a detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 against Sheik Ahamed Hajee on 8 March 1988. The detenu challenged the order in the Calcutta High Court on 5 April 1989, obtaining an interim injunction that was later vacated on 1

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusGADHVI RAMBHAI NATHABHAI AND ORS. ETC.

1994 INSC 22120 June 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat alleged that several accused, including Gadhvi Rambhai Nathabhai, were involved in large‑scale smuggling and distribution of foreign‑origin arms, ammunition and cash, and were charged under the Arms Act, the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) and the Customs Act. The

ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRASversusV. KRISHNAMOORTHY AND ORS.

1997 INSC 16820 February 1997Dismissed

The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, acting as complainant, appealed to the High Court against the sentences imposed on V. Krishnamurthy and others for offences investigated by a Customs Officer, invoking Section 377(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Supreme Court examined whether a Customs Department off

ADISHWAR JAINversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 74419 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Managing Director of an exporting company, was alleged to have misdeclared the value and description of alloy steel exports and to have routed excess proceeds through hawala, leading to investigations by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence. He was arrested in October 2003, released on bail in January

KUBIC DARIUSZversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1990 INSC 1518 January 1990Case Allowed

Polish national Kubic Dariusz was arrested in April 1989 for possession of foreign gold and detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA). He claimed that the grounds of his detention were served only in English, a language he alleged he did not understand, an

SHIV RATAN MAKLM S/O NANDLAL MAKLMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 25016 December 1985Dismissed

Shiv Ratan Makhlam was intercepted at the India‑Nepal border in November 1984 and two pieces of foreign‑marked gold were seized from his trousers. He was arrested, released on bail, and later, in April 1985, the Government issued a detention order under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention o

BHARAT CHAUDHARYversusUNION OF INDIA

2021 INSC 87713 December 2021Disposed off

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence seized over 1.37 lakh tablets from four locations in Chennai, alleging they were psychotropic substances. Accused A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4 (Bharat Chaudhary) were arrested; A-4 was detained based solely on statements of A-1 and A-3 recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. A specia

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusARVIND SHERGILL AND ANR.

2000 INSC 44213 September 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Harinder Pal Singh Shergill was arrested in August 1998 for allegedly possessing US$66,217 at Mumbai airport. He was granted bail, and a later application to cancel the bail was dismissed. On 17 November 1998, the government issued a preventive detention order under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusCHAMPALAL PUNJAJI SHAH

1981 INSC 14012 August 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra charged Champalal Punjaji Shah with criminal conspiracy under S.120B IPC, S.135 of the Customs Act and Defence of India Rules after gold bars with foreign markings were discovered in his flat. The trial was protracted, with the accused contributing to delays, and the High Court acquitted him, c

INDIAN AIRLINES LID.versusPRABHA D. KANAN

2006 INSC 81910 November 2006Case Partly allowed

Prabha D. Kanan, an air hostess promoted to Deputy Manager at Indian Airlines Ltd., was arrested in 2002 for allegedly carrying undeclared foreign currency and her services were terminated on 9 August 2002 under Regulation 13 of the Indian Airlines (Flying Crew) Service Regulations, which allows discharge without enqui

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAXversusM/S SUZLON ENERGY LTD.

2023 INSC 33210 April 2023Disposed off

Suzlon Energy Ltd imported engineering design and drawing blueprints from its sister companies abroad for manufacturing wind turbine generators and classified them as "paper" goods for customs, claiming nil duty and arguing they were not liable to service tax. The Revenue issued show‑cause notices demanding service tax

RAJINDER ARORAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 15410 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Rajinder Arora, an export‑house industrialist, was raided by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on 26 May 2004 and detained, during which he alleged torture and coerced statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act. No prosecution was filed within the statutory 60‑day period, no show‑cause notice was issued, and

TOFAN SINGHversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2013 INSC 7008 October 2013Matter referred to larger bench

Tofan Singh was convicted under Sections 8(c) r/w 21(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for allegedly trafficking 5.250 kg of heroin. The conviction rested primarily on a statement recorded by an investigating officer under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, which the appellant claimed was

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ORS.versusVASANT MAGALAN CHOKSHI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7957 November 2006Dismissed

Customs authorities seized 78 gold bars in 1998, alleging clandestine import and issued show‑cause notices under Sections 111(d) and 112(a) of the Customs Act. The Commissioner initially ordered confiscation of all bars, but the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal set aside that order and remanded the

MINERAL AND METAL TRADING CORPORATIONversusR. C. MISHRA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 1467 April 1993Appeal(s) allowed

Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation (M.M.T.C.) acted as the intermediary in a private barter scheme through which Ferro Alloys Corporation exported manganese and chrome concentrates. The parties executed contracts whereby title to the goods passed to M.M.T.C., which issued letters of credit, shipping documents and

NABHA POWER LIMITED & ANR.versusPUNJAB STATE POWER COROPORATION LIMITED & ANR.

2024 INSC 8335 November 2024Dismissed

The appellants, Nabha Power Ltd. and its associate, bid for a mega‑power project under a Request for Proposal (RFP) that required bidders to consider the law as defined in Clause 1.1 of the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). They argued that a press release dated 01‑Oct‑2009 announcing Cabinet approval of modifications to

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICESversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

2004 INSC 6435 November 2004Dismissed

Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) sold canned computer software packages and was assessed sales tax by the Andhra Pradesh Commercial Tax Officer, who held that the software constituted "goods" under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. TCS appealed, arguing that software is intangible intellectual property and

SMT. ASHA KESHAVRAO BHOSALEversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1985 INSC 2204 October 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, the wife of a man detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, challenged his detention order (s.3(1)) and subsequent declaration (s.9) before the Supreme Court under Article 32. They argued that the government’s delay in disposing a representation

HASMUKH S/O BHAGWANJI M. PATELversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

1980 INSC 1464 August 1980Dismissed

Lallu Jogi Patel was detained on 31 January 1980 under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). He sought copies of the documents relied upon in the grounds of detention and permission for his lawyer to interview him. The State supplied the docume

MST. L.M.S. UMMU SALBBMAversusB.B. GUJARAL & ANR.

1981 INSC 1064 May 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the preventive detention of Jahaubar Moulana under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The detenu argued that the detaining authority had failed to furnish copies of documents mentioned in the grounds of detention, had delayed consideration o

LIBERTY OIL MILLS & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS.

1984 INSC 981 May 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a series of "abeyance circulars" issued under clause 8B of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955, which placed the licence applications of Liberty Oil Mills and 60 other concerns in abeyance pending investigation into alleged illegal import of beef tallow. The petitioners contende

K.T.V. HEALTH FOOD PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS

2023 INSC 911 February 2023Case Partly allowed

K.T.V. Health Food Pvt. Ltd. sought to continue operating a storage terminal and an underground pipeline for edible oil imported through Chennai Port. The Union of India, invoking the 2011 Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification under the Environment Protection Act, granted post‑facto clearance under paragraph‑4.3,

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search