Customs Act, 1962 › Chapter XV — Appeals and Revision
Section 130E. Appeal to Supreme Court
Customs Act, 1962
Bare Act
Appeal to Supreme Court. — An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from -
(a) any judgment of the High Court delivered -
(i) in an appeal made under section 130; or
(ii) on a reference made under section 130 by the Appellate Tribunalbefore the 1st day of July, 2003;
(iii) on a reference made under section 130A, in any case which, on its own motion or on an oral application made by or onbehalf of the party aggrieved, immediately after passing of the judgment, theHigh Court certifies to be a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court; or (b) any order passed before the establishment of theNational Tax Tribunal by the Appellate Tribunal relating, among other things,to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty ofcustoms or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment.
Judgments on Section 130E
- Principal Commissioner Of Customs… vs M/S Radha Engineering Company — Calcutta High Court, 7 Oct 2026. A Tribunal order on the rate of duty or the value of goods for assessment cannot be appealed to the High Court under Section 130; the appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court under Section 130E of the Customs Act.
- M/S. Carestream Health India Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs — Supreme Court of India, 12 Aug 2026. Accessories suitable for use with a number of machines falling under the same Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) are to be classified with those machines under Note 2(b) of Chapter 90 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
- M/S Alupro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise Bangalore-Ii — Supreme Court of India, 27 May 2026. Superficial changes made to goods merely to facilitate their use, which do not alter their fundamental properties, do not amount to 'manufacture' creating a distinct product, and the burden of proving that the resulting…
- The Principal Commissioner Of Customs vs M/S. Lucky Exports — Karnataka High Court, 12 Dec 2025. A person invoking an exemption notification must strictly comply with and clearly establish every condition of the notification, and in case of doubt or ambiguity the benefit goes to the State, not the assessee.
- M/S Coal India Ltd vs Commr.Of Customs(Port) Kolkata — Supreme Court of India, 1 May 2025. Payments made by an importer to the foreign supplier's Indian agent as a condition of sale, being product support services directly relatable to the importation, must be added to the transaction value under Rule 9(1)(e)…
- M/S Bisco Limited Through Its Managing… vs Commissioner Of Customs And Central Excise — Supreme Court of India, 20 Mar 2024. Goods kept outside a bonded warehouse but within the premises under a proper officer's permission under Section 64(d), which is never cancelled or revoked, are not 'improperly or unauthorisedly removed' under Sections…
- M/S.N.C.Alexender vs The Commissioner Of Customs — Madras High Court, 9 Jun 2022. Show cause notices and adjudication orders issued by DRI officers are valid because they are appointed as 'Officers of Customs' under Section 4 of the Customs Act, 1962, and Section 97 of the Finance Act, 2022…
- Indusind Media And Communications Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs New Delhi — Supreme Court of India, 27 Sep 2019. Transaction value must be relatable to the import — amounts payable as a condition of import (including the value of software embedded before shipment) are includible in assessable value, whereas charges for…
- The Commnr. Of Customs(Gen) Mumbai vs Abdulla Koyloth — Supreme Court of India, 29 Oct 2010. Once the nature of goods has been mis-declared, the value declared on the imported goods becomes unacceptable, though the burden of establishing the mis-declaration remains on the Customs authorities, who must then…
- Commissioner Of Customs, New Delhi vs M/S. Phoenix International Ltd. & Anr — Supreme Court of India, 20 Sep 2007. Where imports are split between related entities, the adjudicating authority must look at the entire composite picture to ascertain the real intention behind the arrangement, and goods shipped together as parts of one…
- A S Chattha Exim Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs (Port) — Calcutta High Court, 12 Oct 2026. A CESTAT order on classification, rate of duty or valuation cannot be challenged in the High Court under Section 130; the appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court under Section 130E.
- Commissioner Of Customs General vs Direct Logistics And Export Co Ltd — Bombay High Court, 12 Nov 2025. At the admission stage of a Customs appeal under section 130, the High Court need only find that arguable questions of law arise and decides nothing on the merits, while interim arrangements such as continued investment…
- Automotive Tyre Manufactureres Assn vs The Designated Authority & Ors — Supreme Court of India, 7 Jan 2011. Where the prescribed procedure (Rule 6(6) of the 1995 Anti-dumping Rules) requires a personal hearing, final findings recorded by a Designated Authority who never heard the interested parties violate audi alteram partem…
- Pernod Ricard India(P) Ltd vs Commr.Of Customs, Icd Tughlakabad — Supreme Court of India, 26 Jul 2010. An adjustment under Rule 5(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 can be granted only on 'demonstrated evidence' establishing the reasonableness and accuracy of the adjustment — higher volume of imports per se, or…