2017 (10) TMI 1270 - AT - Customs

Tribunal overturns customs duty liability on deceased importer's family, stresses due process and legal provisions.

Shri Manmohan Kaur Sehgal, Amandeep Singh Versus C.C., New Delhi & C.C., Kolkata (In Amandeep Singh case)

The Tribunal set aside an order holding family members of a deceased importer liable for customs duty and penalties. It emphasized the necessity of ... Determination of duty after the death of importer - at the time of assessment and determination of duty liability through the impugned order, the alleged importer Shri Gurmeet Singh Sehgal is not alive - Held that: - similar issue decided in the case of Shabina Abraham And Others Versus Collector of Central Excise & Customs [2015 (7) TMI 1036 - SUPREME COURT], where it was held that there is in fact no separate machinery provided by the Central Excises and Salt Act to proceed against a dead person when it comes to assessing him to tax under the Act. The present appellants were nowhere in the picture in the proceedings before the adjudicating authority - it is not the case of Revenue recovery proceedings on confirmed duty liability during the life time of an importer. It is a case where the duty liability itself was determined after the death of the proprietor–importer - such demand of duty cannot be confirmed against the deceased person. Consequently, there can be no question of liability on the purported legal heir either for duty or redemption fine. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:1. Liability of family members for customs duty and penalties.2. Legal implications of duty liability after the death of the importer.Analysis:Issue 1: Liability of family members for customs duty and penaltiesThe case involved appeals against an order of the Commissioner of Central Excise regarding imported consignments. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to decide the jurisdiction of the show cause notice issue. The appellants, family members of the deceased importer, were held liable for duty demand and penalties. However, they argued that they were not parties in the proceedings and were never issued any show cause notice. The Tribunal observed that without notice to the present appellants, any liability confirmed by the impugned order cannot be sustained.Issue 2: Legal implications of duty liability after the death of the importerThe legal question revolved around whether duty liability can continue after the death of the importer. Citing the decision in Shabina Abraham, the Tribunal emphasized that no duty demand or consequences can be imposed on the appellants after the importer's death. The Supreme Court's ruling highlighted the absence of legal machinery to transfer liabilities to the legal heirs of a deceased importer. The Tribunal noted that the duty liability was determined post the importer's demise, and as per legal precedent, such demands cannot be confirmed against the deceased person or their legal heirs. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order fixing liability on the appellants for duty or fines, as there was no legal basis for such a finding.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, emphasizing the importance of due process and legal provisions governing duty liability post the importer's death. The judgment underscored the necessity of issuing proper notices and adhering to legal principles when attributing liabilities in customs duty cases involving deceased importers.