2023 (5) TMI 821

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urther penalty was also imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act. 2. The details of the appeals are as follows:- Sr. No. Appeal No. before  CESTAT Order-in- Appeal No. Order-in-Original No. SCN No. Bill  of  Entry No/Date/Value/RF/Penalty 1. C/50601/2019 C-A-CUS- DII- 245/2015 11.03.2015 03/2014/ADC/ICD/TKD dated 10.01.2014 22/2013 dt.20.11.2013 3356359 dt.24.09.2013 Value Rs.21,07,883/- RF Rs.6,00,000/- Penalty Rs.2,00,000/- 2. C/50602/2019 C-A-Cus- DII244/2015 dated 09.03.2015 02/2014/ADC/ICD/TKD dated 10.01....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... but they could not clear the imported consignment  for home consumption, as they were facing acute  financial crunch. Several purchase orders given by the builders/contractors were cancelled due to slow down in economy since 2009-2010. At the relevant time, more than 10 containers were lying as such, pending clearance. Under these circumstances, due to demurrage and TSC charges etc. becomes higher than the cost of the goods, and until and unless the Shipping Lines and Concor provided them the adequate concession, it will be unviable for them to clear the goods. It was also stated that they have imported against 'Special Import Licence' issued by DGFT mentioning the licence number and the date of issue. The appellant also sent a s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he economy and there being lack of funds available with the appellant. Due to adverse business situation, the goods remained uncleared for about 25 to 30 months, thus the show cause notice was issued.  6. It was further urged that when the appellant received the auction notice from the Customs Department, they immediately replied vide  letter dated 17.03.2015 that they have preferred appeal before the Commissioner  of  Customs (Appeals). However, the Department without waiting for the disposal of the appeals, proceeded to auction/sale the goods. Such action of Revenue to auction/sale  the goods, pending disposal of appeals,  is bad in law and against the principles of natural justice. Thus, the appellants we....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ved that  the action of Revenue to auction sale the goods during the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), was clearly contrary to law. The Hon'ble High Court also noticed that the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly concluded that the appellant is entitled to refund of the sale proceeds, as reduced only by the amount of penalty, and no adjustment of redemption fine can be made. The Hon'ble High Court further concluded  that since the goods were not available, redemption fine cannot be adjusted as against the sale proceeds, since the appeal was pending at the relevant time. Accordingly,  the High Court  was pleased to set aside the decision of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal, by its order dated 12.09....