2015 (1) TMI 326 - AT - Customs

Customs Appeal Dismissed Due to Non-Compliance with Pre-Deposit Requirement

M/s BHATIA GLOBAL TRADING LTD AND M/s ASIAN NATURAL RESOURCES (I) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE), MUMBAI

The tribunal dismissed the Misc. applications and subsequent appeal concerning the classification of imported coal as 'bituminous coal' and duty demand ... Waiver of pre deposit - Classification of coal - Held that:- A plain reading of the provisions make it abundantly clear that the Tribunal or Commissioner (Appeals) shall not entertain any appeal under section 128, unless the appellant has made a pre-deposit of 7.5% of the duty in such cases, where duty and penalty is in dispute and appeal is filed before tribunal. Therefore, in terms of amended section 129E with effect from 06/08/2014, this tribunal is barred from entertaining any appeal unless the pre-deposit as mentioned in section 129E is complied with. The law is very clear and there is no ambiguity in the matter. In view of the above, we hold that the appeal is not admissible before this Tribunal, inasmuch as the appellants have not complied with the pre-deposit requirements envisaged in section 129E - Decided against assesse. Issues:Classification of imported coal as 'bituminous coal' and duty demand confirmation.Analysis:The judgment involves the classification of coal imported by the appellant as 'bituminous coal' and the subsequent duty demand confirmation. The appellants filed Misc. applications against Orders-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai. The Adjudicating authority classified the coal as bituminous coal and confirmed a duty demand of specific amounts against the appellants. The appellants urged that the case be heard without requiring any pre-deposit to admit the appeal.The appellant's counsel argued that appeals filed before the amendment in section 129E of the Customs Act would not be governed by the amended provisions. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the counsel emphasized that the right of appeal is substantial, and requiring pre-deposit would undermine this right. On the other hand, the Addl. Commissioner for the Revenue reiterated that section 129E mandates pre-deposit of duty as prescribed, and this requirement cannot be waived.The tribunal carefully considered the submissions from both sides and analyzed the provisions of section 129E as amended by the Financial Act 2014. The section mandates a pre-deposit of a certain percentage of duty demanded or penalty imposed before filing an appeal. The tribunal highlighted that under the amended section 129E, it is prohibited from entertaining any appeal unless the pre-deposit requirement is met. The judgment emphasized that the law is clear without ambiguity, and in this case, the appellants did not comply with the pre-deposit requirements outlined in section 129E. Consequently, the Misc. applications were dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as well.In conclusion, the judgment focuses on the applicability of the pre-deposit requirement under section 129E of the Customs Act, emphasizing that compliance with this provision is essential for the admissibility of an appeal before the tribunal. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory requirements in customs matters to ensure the proper legal process.