2010 (6) TMI 381 - AT - Customs

Appellate Tribunal rules on duty liability calculation for provisionally released goods

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, AHMEDABAD, ruled that duty liability on goods provisionally released should be calculated based on the date of the ... Duty liability – Rate of duty – relevant date - submitted by the learned advocate in the order, held that duty liability to be calculated at the prevailing rates at' the time of passing the order in original - Commissioner (Appeals) decided the confiscation and also has ordered adjustment of amount paid and further the order of Commissioner (Appeals) attained finality since the appellants e not challenging the same - submissions made by the learned advocate that calculation of duty has to be as on the date of order-in-appeal, accepted and held that duty liability e calculated on this basis Issues: Calculation of duty liability on goods provisionally released.In the judgment by Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, AHMEDABAD, the issue revolved around the calculation of duty liability on goods provisionally released. The appellant did not contest the confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty but raised a concern regarding the relevant date for calculating the duty liability on goods provisionally released. The appellant argued that the duty paid at the time of provisional release should be considered a deposit, and the date of order-in-appeal appropriating the amount paid should be deemed as the date of payment of duty. The appellant relied on a previous Tribunal decision in the case of M/s. Siddheshwar Sizers to support this argument.The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and the cited precedent, noting that duty liability should be calculated at the prevailing rates at the time of passing the original order, which in this case was the date of the order-in-appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that since the Commissioner (Appeals) had made a final decision on confiscation and ordered the adjustment of the amount paid, and the appellant did not challenge this decision, the duty liability should indeed be calculated based on the date of the order-in-appeal. Therefore, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's argument that duty liability should be determined on the basis of the date of the order-in-appeal.Conclusively, the appeal was disposed of in the manner that duty liability on the provisionally released goods would be calculated based on the date of the order-in-appeal. The judgment provides clarity on the relevant date for duty liability calculation in such cases, aligning with the principles established in the cited precedent and ensuring consistency in the application of customs regulations.