Binding remand directions and duty quantification: recovery notices fail where verification was not completed before fresh demand

Detention notices demanding duty and interest could not be sustained where the adjudicating authority failed to comply with earlier remand directions requiring verification and quantification of the assessable value and duty liability. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had furnished the required calculations and made deposits, yet the directed verification was not undertaken before further demand was raised. The matter therefore had to be examined afresh by the adjudicating authority after hearing the appellant and completing the quantification exercise. The impugned notices were set aside and the dispute on any remaining duty or interest liability was left open for fresh determination on remand.

---

---

Issues: Whether detention notices raising demand of duty and interest could be sustained when the adjudicating authority had not complied with earlier remand directions for verification and quantification of the assessable value and duty liability, and whether the matter required fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The appellant had complied with the Tribunal's earlier directions by furnishing calculations and depositing amounts, but the adjudicating authority did not carry out the verification directed in the prior order. In that situation, issuance of detention notices for further duty and interest without first completing the directed exercise was inconsistent with the earlier remand order. The dispute as to the correct duty liability and consequential interest therefore had to be examined afresh by the adjudicating authority after hearing the appellant and carrying out the quantification exercise.

Conclusion: The detention notices demanding duty and interest were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh quantification and determination of whether any duty or interest remained payable.

Final Conclusion: The appellant obtained relief against the impugned detention notices, but the substantive duty and interest liability was left open for reconsideration by the adjudicating authority on remand.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an authority acts contrary to binding remand directions and issues recovery notices without first completing the ordered verification and quantification exercise, such notices cannot be sustained and the matter must be restored for fresh decision in accordance with the earlier directions.

---