TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT overturns goods confiscation for mis-declaration, emphasizes speaking order</h1> <h3>TYCO ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS (I) PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUS., BANGALORE</h3> TYCO ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS (I) PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUS., BANGALORE - 2007 (219) E.L.T. 607 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues Involved: Violation of principles of natural justice, Mis-declaration of imported goods, Confiscation of goods, Duty levied without reasons, Release of goods on bond, Remand for detailed considerationIn this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, BANGALORE, the issue of violation of principles of natural justice was raised due to a case involving mis-declaration of imported goods. The appellants had imported rectifier NP2500 UAC WITH NPC IB CARD, but upon examination, it was found that there was a mis-declaration. The appellants argued that it was a genuine mistake in dispatching the correct document, which they immediately rectified. However, they were not issued a show cause notice, and the Commissioner confiscated the goods, granting redemption on a fine and penalty, and demanding duty.The learned Counsel contended that the order violated principles of natural justice as there was no request for waiver of show cause notice to the Dy. Commissioner. They argued that no duty was leviable, and the confirmation of duty without reasons was unjust. They requested the release of goods on bond and a detailed hearing. On the other hand, the JCDR opposed the release of goods on bond but agreed to remand the case for a detailed order after issuing a show cause notice.Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that the order was not a speaking order, lacking reasons to support the mis-declaration finding. The appellants' explanation for the mistake in sending documents was noted, and a contradiction in the order was observed. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner for a decision on releasing the goods on bond and a detailed consideration within one month after notifying the appellants. The appeal was allowed for a de novo consideration by the Commissioner. The Registry was directed to expedite the issuance of this order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
