CESTAT Kolkata Denies Full Penalty Waiver, Orders Deposit: Customs Act 1962 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA denied the appellant's request for a total waiver of penalties imposed under sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA denied the appellant's request for a total waiver of penalties imposed under sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit &8377; 1.50 Lakhs in both appeals within eight weeks. Upon compliance, the remaining dues in both appeals would be waived, and recovery stayed during the appeal process. Failure to make the deposit would result in the dismissal of both appeals without further notice.
Issues: Application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty under section 112(a) and 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962.
The judgment by Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA involved two applications seeking waiver of pre-deposit of penalties of &8377; 10.00 Lakhs each, imposed under sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant was found to be involved in the mis-declaration of imported goods initially declared as suitcases but later discovered to consist of various items like menswear, spectacle frames, mobile batteries, and T-shirts. The Commissioner, after analyzing the evidence, imposed penalties as per detailed findings in Appeal No.70452 and Appeal No.70453. The Tribunal noted that the findings did not show any apparent error and were reasoned. Although the appellant contended against the order, the Tribunal found no prima facie case for total waiver at that stage. Acknowledging the financial hardship expressed by the appellant's counsel, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit &8377; 1.50 Lakhs in both appeals within eight weeks. Upon compliance, the balance dues in both appeals would be waived, and recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency. Failure to make the deposit would lead to the dismissal of both appeals without further notice. The judgment was pronounced and dictated in an open court by Dr. D.M. Misra.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.