TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (1) TMI 692
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at they are entitled for remission of duty under Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962, as the goods damaged due to rain were not cleared for home consumption. However, Revenue proceeded against the appellants demanding duty on the imported equipments, which were damaged. There was also a proposal for demand of interest. It was the submission of the appellant that damage to the goods had occurred due to seepage of water on account of torrential rains during September and October, 2005. They submitted that they had taken all the precautionary measures and they could not salvage the goods, as the rain was severe. Therefore, they were entitled for remission under Section 23 of the Customs Act. The lower authority did not accept the contentions of the appellant. Therefore, he confirmed the duty demand. He also demanded interest. The appellants were highly aggrieved over the impugned order. Therefore, they had appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the lower authority. The appellants are highly aggrieved over the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. Therefore, they have come before this Tribunal for relief. 4.1&em....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; The demand of duty is not sustainable, as remission is available under Section 23 of the Customs Act. The networking equipment were damaged. It was submitted that the fact that there is total damage to the equipment is fully accepted by the lower authority. In these circumstances, they ought to have been granted remission of duty under Section 23 of the Customs Act. (ii) A plain reading of the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 23 shows that once the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner is satisfied that the imported goods have been lost on account of being destroyed, then the authority has no option but to remit the duty on such goods. This is evident from the use of the expression 'shall' in the statute. The satisfaction of the authority about the loss due to destruction may be subjective, but once such subjective satisfaction is forthcoming, then the duty involved on the goods cannot be demanded. The only additional condition to be fulfilled is that the goods in question should have been destroyed before its clearance for home consumption. The appellants submit that this condition is also fulfilled in their case inasmuch as the goo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....directed that where Show Cause Notices are issued without invoking the extended period, any Show Cause Notice involving value of goods up to Rs. 20 lakhs are to be adjudicated by Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner. In other words, any Show Cause Notice involving a value in excess of Rs. 20 lakhs has to be adjudicated only by the Commissioner of Customs and not by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs involving duty itself in excess of Rs. 1 crore, as has been done in the impugned order. 5. The learned Departmental representative reiterated the impugned order. She said that the Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, has clearly given a finding that Section 23 would not be applicable in the present case. It was argued that Section 23 would be applicable in cases of goods lost, destroyed or abandoned. In the present case, it will not be applicable, as the goods were damaged. When there is a damage, it was pointed out, that the appellant could have asked for the abatement of duty on the damaged or deteriorated goods, before clearance of home consumption, on account of any accident not due to any willful act, negligence or default of the owner, his employee or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Remission of duty on lost, destroyed or abandoned goods. - (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of section 13, where it is shown to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs that any imported goods have been lost (otherwise than as a result of pilferage) or destroyed, at any time before clearance for home consumption, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs shall remit the duty on such goods. (2) The owner of any imported goods may, at any time before an order for clearance of goods for home consumption under section 47 or an order for permitting the deposit of goods in a warehouse under section 60 has been made, relinquish his title to the goods and thereupon he shall not be liable to pay the duty thereon." 6.1 If the goods which have been imported become unusable for some reason or other, then, we have to take it that they have been destroyed. In fact, a wider interpretation should be given to the word 'lost' or 'destroyed'. It is also a fact that the goods are still in the warehouse and they have not been cleared. Hence, in our view, Section 23 is clearly applicable to the impugned ....