TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1091
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ained the port clearance for Mumbai port, but on voyage, he received instruction from owner for proceeding to Alang, Bhavnagar. Therefore, the shipping agent filed the above mentioned bill of entry dated 02.07.2013, in accordance to Circular No. 58/97-Cus dated 06.11.1997 and circular No. 16/Customs dated 13.06.2012, for the coastal goods consumed during voyage from Cochin to Alang with respect to Fuel Oil 45.063 MT having Assessable value of Rs. 18,86,085/-, Diesel Oil (MGO) 11.41 MT, having assessable value of Rs. 6,82,227/- and lube Oil 300 liters having Assessable value of Rs. 61,885/- and consumable stores 27 packages for Rs. 30,215/-, with applicable customs duties of the said coastal consumed goods. However, due to want of circulating copy, as it was not onboard, the subject bill of entry was assessed provisionally. The shipping agent paid the customs duty of Rs. 5,05,070/- vide TR-6 challan No. IMP-SBY/252/2013-14 dated 03.7.2013. Subsequently, the lower authority requested to the Customs authorities at Cochin to provide the arrival/departure bunker provision figures/circulating copy Cochin Customs vide their letter dated 10.11.2014 furnished the documents related to ship p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in to Alang and paid custom duty of Rs. 5,05,070/- vide TR-6 Challan dated 03.07.2013. However, the appellant failed to pay the differential duty and interest therein which has arisen at the time of final assessment of the Bill of Entry No. SBY/84-A/2013-14 dated 02.07.2013. Since the appellant have themselves filed the bill of entry for consumption of fuel and oil (bunker) and provisions (consumable stores) during the coastal run from Cochin to Alang, therefore, they are liable to pay differential duty alongwith applicable interest. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also come to the conclusion that since the Adjudicating Authority has held that appellant had suppressed/ mis-declared the quantity of bunkers consumed during the coastal run from Cochin to Alang with an intention to evade payment of Customs duty, therefore, the penalty imposed under section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 is correct and the Adjudicating Authority has committed no error. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original passed by Adjudicating Authority and rejected the appeal. 2.2 Feeling aggrieved from impugned order dated 04.05.2018 passed by learned Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), the present appea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ally assessed and appellant paid customs duty of Rs. 5,05,070/- though the appellant did not contest it previously, it is illegal and without proper jurisdiction, as the vessel was a 'foreign-going vessel' and the goods consumed during the voyage from Cochin to Alang should have been exempted from duty. Therefore, the payment of duty was not warranted in the first place. In such a scenario, there is no question of demanding differential duty, as the entire payment of customs duty was void in itself. The demand of differential duty is, therefore, without merit and should be set aside. 3.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant has relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Lotus Danship Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs -JAMNAGAR (Prev.) - 2024 (6) TMI 1015 -CESTAT AHMEDABAD. The question involved in this case was whether during the period from 26.09.1975 to 17.01.1976 the vessel M.V. Anupama was a 'foreign going vessel' or a 'coastal vessel'. During this period, the vessel functioned as a daughter vessel to lighten the mother vessels (super-tankers) which had brought cargo from abroad and which, because of their big size, were unable to come alongside of Indian....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... any costal voyage or undertaken any coastal operation. Therefore, the fuel consumed during their trans-shipment from Bedi port to Alang cannot be considered as dutiable. 3.4 Learned Counsel for the appellant also cited the decision of this Tribunal in the case of C.C. Ahmedabad vs. Nandan Exim Limited Final Order No. A/11597/2023 dated 24.07.2023 in which it has been held that benefit of exemption, which is available has to be allowed in spite of the fact that whether it was claimed at the time of import or not. The benefit of a notification cannot go away on the findings as observed/ recorded in this Revenue's appeal or order-in-original. The Adjudicating Authority on the one hand observes that ignorance of law is no excuse but on the other hand he has not correctly appreciated that it applies to both sides. Government also cannot retain such excess payment of CVD amount which is not required to be paid by importer in the law. In support, the advocate for appellant places reliance on the decision reported in 2007 (209) ELT 321 (SC) in the matter of Share Medical Care vs. UOI to drive home their point that exemption can be claimed even at a later stage. 3.5 Learned Counsel ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Superintendent (AR) for the department and perused the record. 6. I agree with the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the nature of the voyage whether it was 'foreign run' or it was reverted to coastal run, should not depend upon the filing of Bill of Entry as it was allegedly presented on direction of the Customs officers. The appellant claims that they went ahead with the process of Bill of Entry and payment of Customs duty in order to speed up the process of import of vessel which was legally not payable. I am of the view that the goods which are consumed by the vessel in question, MV TABA, was a 'foreign going vessel' and it was not on 'coastal run' during its voyage between two Indian ports i.e. Cochin to Alang and therefore, the goods consumed by it are excluded from the levy of Customs duty as per Section 87 of the Customs Act, 1962. The learned Commissioner erred in holding that the appellant is liable to pay differential duty alongwith applicable interest since the nature of the vessel is the 'coastal run' from Cochin to Alang. It appears that the Commissioner (Appeals) has only relied on the fact that the appellant filed Bill of Entry and paid th....