2007 (9) TMI 475 - AT - Customs

Appellate ruling enforces duty payment on imported goods, upholding auction validity under Customs Act.

The appellate authority ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the importer was liable to pay the duty and interest as per the double duty bond ... Demand - Expiry of warehousing period Issues involved: Import of goods, warehousing, duty payment, auction of goods, enforcement of double duty bond, violation of Customs Act provisions.In the present case, M/s. Veeforess Exporters imported 'Whole Arecanuts' and warehoused the consignment. The importer failed to clear the goods within the warehousing period, leading to the department auctioning the goods due to non-payment of duty. The issue revolved around the recovery of the balance dues from the importer u/s Section 72(1)(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.The Revenue contended that the importer was still liable to pay the duty and interest, citing the double duty bond executed by the importer. The department argued that the goods improperly removed from the warehouse were subject to duty payment, as per Section 72 of the Customs Act and the Apex Court judgment in a relevant case.On the other hand, the respondent's counsel argued that the bond had lapsed within a year, and no dues could be enforced from the importer. It was contended that the department had violated the provisions of Section 72(2) by auctioning the goods without issuing notice to the importer, thus relieving the importer from any obligation to pay dues.Upon careful consideration of the case records and submissions, it was found that the case fell under Section 72(1)(b) rather than Section 72(1)(d) of the Customs Act. The appellate authority set aside the lower authorities' orders, stating that the demand was sustainable under Section 72(1) for goods not cleared even after the warehousing period. The Revenue was directed to take action to recover the balance dues in accordance with Section 72 of the Act.