TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
The Hon'ble CESTAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in Commissioner of Customs Preventive-New Delhi Versus M/s Cultraro Autocomp Solutions Pvt Ltd., Haryana - 2026 (3) TMI 1093 - CESTAT NEW DELHI held that the Show Cause Notice ('SCN') issued after the period of limitation in the adjudication proceedings is void.
Facts:
M/s. Cultraro Autocomp Solutions Pvt ('Respondent') imported certain goods and received the concessional rate of customs duty vide Notification 32/1997-C dated 01.04.1997. Under the said notification, re-export of goods imported in 6 months was necessary from the date of import. Whereas, after the investigation by customs authorities, it was found that 11 bills of entry goods were not re-exported within six months, for all the imports made by the respondent during the financial year ('FY') 2017-2018 and 2018-19. As a consequence, the adjudicating authorities issued the SCN on 12.02.2021 to demand duty from the appellant on the goods imported by them by denying the benefit of Notification No. 32/1997-C dated 01.04.1997.
The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand against the respondent, but on appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) dropped the proceedings against the respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue has filed this appeal before the Hon'ble CESTAT Principal Bench.
Issues:
Whether the adjudicating authorities can issue SCN after the period of limitation given under section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962('the act')?
Held:
The Hon'ble CESTAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in Commissioner of Customs Preventive-New Delhi Versus M/s Cultraro Autocomp Solutions Pvt Ltd., Haryana - 2026 (3) TMI 1093 - CESTAT NEW DELHIheld as under:
- Noted that, although in the case of 11 bills of entry, goods could not be re-exported within six months, nor could the respondent seek extension of time. But those goods have been re-exported till now.
- SCN was required to be issued within the period of limitation. Whereas the SCN has been issued after more than three years, which is highly time-barred.
Hence, appeal filed by revenue dismissed.
Relevant Sections:
Section 28 of the Act: Recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded.-
1(a): the proper officer shall, within two years from the relevant date, serve notice on the person chargeable with the duty or interest which has not been so levied or paid or which has been short-levied or short-paid or to whom the refund has erroneously been made, requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice:
Provided that before issuing notice, the proper officer shall hold pre-notice consultation with the the person chargeable with duty or interest in such manner as may be prescribed;