Customs Act, 1962 › Chapter XIVA — Settlement of Cases
Section 127B. Application for settlement of cases
Customs Act, 1962
Bare Act
Application for settlement of cases. –
(1) Any importer, exporter or any other person (hereinafter referred to as the applicant in this Chapter) may, in respect of a case, relating to him make an application, before adjudication to the Settlement Commission to have the case settled, in such form and in such manner as may be specified by rules, and containing a full and true disclosure of his duty liability which has not been disclosed before the proper officer, the manner in which such liability has been incurred, the additional amount of customs duty accepted to be payable by him and such other particulars as may be specified by rules including the particulars of such dutiable goods in respect of which he admits short levy on account of misclassification, under-valuation or inapplicability of exemption notification or otherwise and such application shall be disposed of in the manner hereinafter provided:
Provided that no such application shall be made unless, -
(a) the applicant has filed a bill of entry, or a shipping bill, or a bill of export, or made a baggage declaration, or a label or declaration accompanying the goods imported or exported through post or courier, as the case may be, and in relation to such document or documents, a show cause notice has been issued to him by the proper officer;
(b) the additional amount of duty accepted by the applicant in his application exceeds three lakh rupees; and
(c) the applicant has paid the additional amount of customs duty accepted by him along with interest due under section 28AA:
Provided further that no application shall be entertained by the Settlement Commission under this sub-section in cases which are pending in the Appellate Tribunal or any court:
Provided also that no application under this sub-section shall be made in relation to goods to which section 123 applies or to goods in relation to which any offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) has been committed:
Provided also that no application under this sub-section shall be made for the interpretation of the classification of the goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975).
(1A)[Omitted] (2)[Omitted]
(3) Every application made under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied by such fees as may be specified by rules.
(4) An application made under sub-section (1) shall not be allowed to be withdrawn by the applicant.
(5) Any person, other than an applicant referred to in sub-section (1), may also make an application to the Settlement Commission in respect of a show cause notice issued to him in a case relating to the applicant which has been settled or is pending before the Settlement Commission and such notice is pending before an adjudicating authority, in such manner and subject to such conditions, as may be specified by rules.
Provided that no application shall be made under this section on or after the 1st day of April, 2025:
Provided further that on and from the date of the constitution of the Interim Board, every pending application shall be dealt by it from the stage at which such pending application stood immediately before its constitution.
Judgments on Section 127B
- Messrs. Siddhi Vinayak Enterprises And… vs The Union Of India Through The Secretary… — Bombay High Court, 4 Apr 2017. Once the 14-day period under section 127C(1) expires without an admissibility order, a settlement application is deemed allowed to be proceeded with, and the Settlement Commission cannot thereafter reject it as…
- Union Of India (Uoi) Through The… vs Hoganas India Ltd. And Ors. [Alongwith… — Bombay High Court, 21 Jul 2005. The Settlement Commission under Chapter XIV-A has a very wide jurisdiction to entertain all kinds of settlement applications under Section 127B — including cases involving fraud or mis-declaration — provided the…
- Yamal Manojbhai Jagada vs Commissioner Of Customs Airport &… — CESTAT, 15 May 2026. Under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 no condition can be imposed while offering redemption of confiscated goods — the owner may opt for home consumption on payment of duty, interest, fine and penalty, or for…
- Anil Kapoor vs Niranjan Subudhi — Delhi High Court, 28 Jun 2025. The Settlement Commission constituted under the Customs Act, 1962 can grant immunity only from prosecution and penalty under the Customs Act in cases involving the levy, assessment and collection of customs duty, and…
- M/S.asianet Satellite Communication Limited, Now Represented By Its Senior Vice President vs The Customs And Central Excise — Madras High Court, 19 Feb 2025. Where an EPCG licence period stands extended and export realisations for the extended period are supported by documentary evidence such as bank certificates, the Settlement/adjudicating authority must consider them and…
- M/S.Alba Industries Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Customs… — Madras High Court, 31 Jul 2024. Since the bar on successive settlement applications under Section 127L(2) was deleted by the Finance Act, 2010, an adjudication order passed without a noticee's participation while settlement under Chapter XIV-A is…
- Kundan Care Products Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs-New Delhi Acc… — CESTAT, 31 Jul 2024. A penalty imposed under section 112 of the Customs Act for 'contravention' of statutory provisions is not a penalization for an 'offence', since offences and penalties are distinct categories; therefore, a licensee who…
- M/S Seville Products Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs (Icd-Tkd)… — Delhi High Court, 18 May 2023. A settlement before the Customs Settlement Commission under Section 127B operates only for the declarant and confers no automatic immunity from penalty on co-noticees, whose liabilities are separate and severable under…
- Yamal Manojbhai vs Union Of India — Supreme Court of India, 4 May 2023. Watches being goods to which Section 123 applies, the proviso to Section 127B bars recourse to the Settlement Commission for cases involving their illicit importation, though here the Bench's divergence of opinion led…
- Honeycom Synergies vs Commissioner Of Customs (Export) & Ors. — Delhi High Court, 19 Nov 2019. Co-operation with the Settlement Commission does not, ipso facto, insulate an applicant from penalty, though non-cooperation does disentitle an applicant thereto — immunity under Section 127H(1) is discretionary and may…
- M/S.Usha International Ltd vs Customs & Central Excise Settlement Commission Additional Bench — Madras High Court, 30 Oct 2019. A settlement application under Section 127B cannot be rejected as non-maintainable without a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and prima facie the second proviso to Section 127B(1) bars only applications where…
- Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat vs Additional Commissioner Of Customs… — Calcutta High Court, 21 Sep 2017. Where a revenue statute like the Customs Act constitutes a complete code and provides an efficacious special remedy such as the Section 128 appeal, the writ court will not normally entertain an Article 226 petition…
- Commissioner Of Central Excise And Customs, Cochin Who Is The Third vs M/S.asianet Satellite Communications Limited — Madras High Court, 23 Feb 2011. A Settlement Commission's order passed on a full and true disclosure can be set aside only if it is contrary to the provisions of the Act and that contravention has prejudiced the party, since judicial review examines…
- Alpesh Navinchandra Shah vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors — Supreme Court of India, 26 Feb 2007. The purpose of passing a detention order is to prevent the detenu from continuing his prejudicial activity but not to punish him, so where the case has been fully settled before the Settlement Commission with duty paid…
- Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Ltd. vs Union Of India (Uoi) — Bombay High Court, 21 Jul 2005. The Settlement Commission under Chapter XIV-A can entertain all kinds of settlement applications — including those involving fraud or mis-declaration — provided the mandatory conditions of Section 127B(1) are met (bill…
- Commr. Of Cus. (Port) vs Settlement Commission, Cus. And C. Ex. — Calcutta High Court, 23 Aug 2004. The Settlement Commission's power under Section 127H of the Customs Act, 1962 to waive interest extends only to interest chargeable under the Act, and cannot be exercised to waive interest payable under a statutory…
- Pratibha Syntext Ltd. vs Union Of India (Uoi) — Bombay High Court, 28 Jul 2003. Where an importer breaches both the advance licence and the duty-exemption notification, the executed bond making him liable to pay duty with interest empowers the Settlement Commission to order recovery of duty with…
- Commr. Of Cus. (Air), Chennai vs Cus. & C. Ex. Settlement Commission — Madras High Court, 18 Oct 2001. An application under Section 127B lies only in respect of 'a case' under Section 127A(b) — proceedings for the levy, assessment and collection of customs duty — and not for cases of mis-declaration or smuggling detected…
- Responsive Industries Ltd vs Commssioner Of Cgst & Central Excise… — CESTAT, 22 Dec 2023. A case of diversion of duty-exempt goods cannot be made out without evidence of the actual movement of the goods alleged to have been diverted, and standard input output norms (SION) are per-material ceilings or…
- M/S. Millions Fashion vs The Customs — Madras High Court, 19 Feb 2020. A settlement applicant under Section 127B must maintain a clear and consistent stand on its admitted liability, and where the Settlement Commission rejects an application solely because of an unexplained change of…