Settlement Commission Upheld in Denying Interest Immunity under Customs Act

The High Court upheld the Settlement Commission's decision to deny interest immunity to the petitioner under the Customs Act. Despite granting immunity from penalty and prosecution, the court found that the petitioner's breach of contractual obligations by failing to meet export requirements justified the Commission's imposition of 15% interest on duty liability. The court emphasized the discretionary powers of the Commission and ruled that its decision should not be interfered with, citing the petitioner's voluntary choice to seek Settlement Commission adjudication and the contractual bond agreeing to pay interest on duty.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner seeks quashing of order for non-grant of interest immunity by Settlement Commission under Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the Settlement Commission's order under the Customs Act, seeking immunity from interest on duty liability. The Settlement Commission had settled the duty liability at Rs. 13,47,839/- and ordered the petitioner to pay interest at 15% from the date of import of the first consignment till payment, while granting immunity from penalty and prosecution. The petitioner contended that the Settlement Commission had jurisdiction to grant immunity from interest, citing judgments from Calcutta and Madras High Courts and referring to Section 127H of the Act.

The respondents argued that the Settlement Commission had the discretion to grant immunity from interest wholly or partly, and in this case, the petitioner voluntarily chose Settlement Commission adjudication. They emphasized that the petitioner had executed a bond agreeing to pay interest on duty and that the Settlement Commission's decision should not be interfered with. The respondents relied on a Bombay High Court judgment to support their stance.

The High Court, after considering arguments from both sides, found no merit in the petition. It noted that the petitioner invoked Settlement Commission jurisdiction by applying for dispute settlement regarding capital goods import under an Export Promotion Capital Goods license. The petitioner failed to meet export obligations and sought immunity from penalty and interest. The Settlement Commission settled the matter at Rs. 13,47,839/-, holding the petitioner liable to pay with 15% interest from import date. Immunity from penalty and prosecution was granted, subject to payment of all dues, including interest. The court observed that the Settlement Commission's denial of interest immunity was based on the contractual obligation arising from the bond executed by the petitioner. The court concluded that the Settlement Commission's decision was a discretionary one and should not be interfered with under writ jurisdiction.

The court highlighted that since the petitioner breached the bond by not fulfilling export obligations, customs authorities were entitled to enforce the bond and recover duty with interest. The court referenced a Madras High Court judgment to explain that while the Settlement Commission has the power to waive interest in contractual obligations, it is not obligated to grant interest immunity. Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the Settlement Commission's decision to deny interest immunity based on the petitioner's breach of contractual obligations and the exercise of discretionary powers by the Settlement Commission.

---