2001 (4) TMI 321 - AT - Customs

Tribunal allows document submission, emphasizes fair process, confirms Customs duty owed, waives penalties

The Tribunal granted the application to take certain documents on record, including affidavits clarifying averments made earlier. Despite a delay in ... Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Additional evidence - Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit Issues:1. Granting application for taking on record certain documents.2. Adjournment request by Revenue for engaging senior counsel.3. Confirmation of Customs duty under the Customs Act, 1962.4. Demand under Section 28B of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944.5. Discussion on penalties imposed and waiver of pre-deposit.Issue 1: Granting application for taking on record certain documentsThe Tribunal granted an application for taking on record certain documents, including the reply to the show cause notice and two affidavits filed by officers of the appellant company. The documents were inadvertently not placed on record earlier, and the averments made in the affidavits were clarified to have been made before the respective authority during earlier proceedings. The application was granted as the DR did not have serious objections, and the documents were taken on record.Issue 2: Adjournment request by Revenue for engaging senior counselThe Revenue requested an adjournment to engage a senior counsel during the stay applications. The Tribunal noted a letter from the office of the Commissioner of Customs supporting the request for an adjournment. Despite the delay in engaging a senior counsel, the Tribunal proceeded to hear both sides on the stay applications, emphasizing that the disposal should not be solely governed by the speed at which the Board operates.Issue 3: Confirmation of Customs duty under the Customs Act, 1962The impugned order confirmed Customs duty of significant amounts under the Customs Act, 1962. The duty was related to the clearances made by the appellant company, involving both imported and indigenously manufactured petroleum products. The Commissioner held that certain goods were imported, leading to a higher duty burden, which the company paid. The Tribunal noted the payments made by the company and the demand confirmed by the Commissioner.Issue 4: Demand under Section 28B of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944A demand was made under Section 28B of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, amounting to a substantial sum. The issue arose from a comparison of valuation between imported and indigenously produced goods, leading to a discrepancy in the duty collected. The Tribunal discussed the independent nature of the provisions cited and decided to waive the condition of pre-deposit for this duty amount.Issue 5: Discussion on penalties imposed and waiver of pre-depositThe Tribunal observed that the issue leading to penalties seemed to arise from the fixation of prices, which was beyond the control of the appellant company. The Tribunal decided to waive the pre-deposit of the duty amount and penalties imposed during the pendency of the appeals. The significant sums involved and the importance of the issues led to the decision to post the appeals for final hearing on specific dates, allowing the Revenue time to appoint a senior counsel.