Delhi High Court · 2025-03-21
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ICD IMPORT) vs SUZUKI MOTORCYCLE INDIA PVT LTD.
- Citation / case number
- CUSAA-57/2025 2025:DHC:1896-DB
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ICD IMPORT)
- Respondent
- SUZUKI MOTORCYCLE INDIA PVT LTD.
Judgment text excerpt
$~23 to 25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 21s March, 2025 + CUSAA 57/2025 & CM APPLs. 16542-45/2025 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ICD IMPORT) .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC CBIC with Mr. Umang Misra and Ms. Arya Suresh Nair, Advocates (Mob. 7558898905). versus SUZUKI MOTORCYCLE INDIA PVT LTD. .....Respondent Through: None. 24 WITH + CUSAA 58/2025 & CM APPLs.16674-77/2025 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ICD IMPORT) .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC CBIC with Mr. Umang Misra and Ms. Arya Suresh Nair, Advocates. versus SUZUKI MOTORCYCLES INDIA PVT LTD. .....Respondent Through: None. 25 AND + CUSAA 59/2025 & CM APPLs.16680-83/2025 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ICD IMPORT) .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC CBIC with Mr. Umang Misra and Ms. Arya Suresh Nair, Advocates. versus SUZUKI MOTORCYCLE INDIA PVT LTD. .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) Signature Not Verified Signed By:MANJEET CUSAA 57/2025 & connected matters Page 1 of 12 KAUR Signing Date:24.03.2025 17:56:47 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. These three appeals are filed by the Appellant- Commissioner of Customs(‘ICD IMPORT’) arising out of the impugned order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter, ‘CESTAT’) dated 25th April, 2024. 3. The brief background of the case is that the Respondent company - M/s Suzuki Motors Pvt. Ltd. is stated to beengaged in import and sale of motorcycles and motor parts in India.Over different periods, it had paid Special Additional Duty (hereinafter, ‘SAD’) qua certain bills of entry. The refund of the deposited SAD was sought by the Respondents, which was rejected by the Order-in-Original an