Appellate tribunal rules against duty demand on goods from Pakistan under Notification No. 05/2019-Cus.

The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in an appeal against the demand of duty for goods imported from Pakistan under Notification No. 05/2019-Cus. The tribunal held that the appellants were not liable to pay duty at the increased rate introduced by the notification since the bills of entry were filed before the notification was issued, aligning with the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. The tribunal emphasized the importance of the timing of bill submission and goods arrival in determining duty liability, ultimately directing authorities to release the goods and granting relief to the appellants.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against demand of duty based on Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019 for goods imported from Pakistan.

Analysis:
The appellants imported various goods from Pakistan, including cement, ajwain, goggles, and dry dates. The Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019 imposed a 200% import duty on goods from Pakistan, significantly increasing the IGST rate. The appellants, registered with DGFT and CGST, filed bills of entry on the same day the goods entered Indian Territory, before the notification was issued at 8:30 pm. The issue revolved around whether duty was payable based on the duty rate at the time of filing the bills of entry or the increased rate post-notification.

The appellants argued that since the bills of entry were filed before the notification, they were not liable to pay duty as per the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in a similar case. Conversely, the authorized representative relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court to assert the duty liability of the appellants.

The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court's judgment emphasized the importance of both the presentation of the bill of entry and the arrival of goods in determining the duty rate. It differentiated scenarios based on the timing of bill presentation and goods arrival, concluding that if both occurred before the notification, the increased duty rate could not be applied. The judgment highlighted that the notification aimed to discourage imports from Pakistan, not penalize Indian importers, and retrospective application of the increased duty rate was impermissible.

Based on the High Court's ruling and the timing of bill submission and goods entry, the appellate tribunal held that the appellants were not liable to pay duty as per the increased rate introduced by the notification. The tribunal set aside the impugned orders and directed authorities to release the goods within seven days of the order communication, granting relief to the appellants.

---