TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1079
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - VII (impugned order). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Chennai Zonal Unit on intelligence allegedly found that branded glass chatons were imported in the name of "Artificial Stones" / "Imitation Stones" etc by grossly mis-declaring the item description and value, besides clearing the consignments in the name of fictitious and non-existing Import Export Codes (IECS) through Air Cargo Complex and also through the seaport at Chennai. Investigations made by DRI allegedly revealed that several such consignments were cleared by one Shri A. Santhakumar, proprietor of M/s S.R. Cargo, Chennai. It was further revealed that he had facilitated clearances in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ates that the appellant purchased 420 Kgs of glass chaton's having a market value of 12-13 lakhs. They were not concerned with the rest of the goods valued at 6.78 Cr, hence confirmation of duty of Rs 1,63,18,565/- against the appellant is wrong and beyond the scope of the SCN. C) Duty cannot be confirmed jointly and severally from more than one person and such confirmation in the impugned order is erroneous. 3.2 The Ld. A.R. for revenue has taken us through the impugned order and has reiterated the findings given therein. 4. Having heard the rival contentions and perusing the record we find that an important question of law raised by the appellant is that duty cannot be confirmed jointly and severally from more than one person and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sly convey the three components of tax law i.e. (i) the subject of the tax, (ii) the person who is liable to pay the tax and the (iii) rate at which the tax is to be paid. Subsequent judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have added a fourth component/ element i.e. the measure or value to which the rate will be applied for computing the liability [See: Govind Saran Ganga Saran Vs CST - 1985 Supp SCC 205 (6); Mathuram Agrawal Vs State of M P - (1999) 8 SCC 667 (12); Union of India Vs Mohit Minerals (P) Ltd. - (2022) 10 SCC 700 (97)]. We are in this case concerned with point (ii) above i.e. determining the person who is liable to pay tax. 7. As stated, above Article 13(3) provides that "law includes any ordinance, order, by-law, rule, noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Policy, states that in relation to the authorisation issued to a merchant exporter, any bond required to be executed by the importer in terms of the notification shall be executed jointly by the merchant exporter and the supporting manufacturer binding themselves jointly and severally to comply with the conditions specified in the notification. 10. We find that the order has not discussed this legal issue and has thus deprived us of the views of the Original Authority on this important point of law. The appeal memorandum also does not contain copies of the documents relied upon in the SCN. We thus feel that this is a fit case to remand the matter for a detailed decision on the legal issue involved and its implication on the merits of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....person" shall include any company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not;" Hence a person includes a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not. A decision is available as a precedent only if it decides a question of law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in Secunderabad Club Vs CIT, [ Civil Appeal Nos. 5195-5201 of 2012, Dated: August 17, 2023] examined the issue of precedent and stated as under; "14. . . . According to the well-settled theory of precedents, every decision contains three basic ingredients: (i) findings of material facts, direct and inferential. An inferential finding of fact is the inference which the Judge draws from the direct or perceptible facts; (....