Joint and several customs liability cannot stand without identifying the actual importer; matter remanded for fresh adjudication.

Customs duty and penalty cannot be fastened on multiple persons on a joint and several basis without first determining the individual role and liability of each appellant, including who was the actual importer or defaulter in relation to the disputed consignments. The Tribunal noted that the proper course is to examine the documentary evidence, identify the person legally liable, and then pass a reasoned order. The impugned order was therefore set aside insofar as the appellants were concerned, and the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh, speaking adjudication on individual liability, if any.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order fastening customs duty and penalty on the appellants on a joint and several basis could be sustained, and whether the matter required remand for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The Appeals challenged the adjudication on the ground that duty liability had been attributed collectively rather than by identifying the actual importer or defaulter in relation to the three consignments under dispute. The Tribunal noted that the cited precedents lay down that duty cannot be fastened on multiple persons on a joint and several basis without determining the role and liability of each person, and that the proper course is to set aside such orders and remit the matter for de novo adjudication so that the real liable person may be identified on the basis of the documentary evidence.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside insofar as the appellants were concerned, and the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh, speaking adjudication to determine the individual role and liability of each appellant, if any.

---