2003 (3) TMI 390 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of Mistake (ROM) application seeking rectification in the Final Order regarding extension of time under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 for issue of notice, refund of Rs. 20 lakhs, non-cooperation leading to delay in issuing Show Cause Notice, diversion of imported goods, undervaluation of consignment, voluntary payment of Rs. 20 lakhs, coercion towards recovery of amount, nature of Rs. 20 lakhs under dispute, mis-construed scope of ROM application.

Rectification of Mistake (ROM) Application:
The Revenue filed a ROM application seeking rectification in the Final Order regarding extension of time under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 for issue of notice. The Bench had previously held that the Commissioner's order regarding the extension of time was not to be interfered with. The ROM application raised concerns about the voluntary payment of Rs. 20 lakhs and the necessity for its refund. The Revenue contended that the amount was voluntarily deposited by the party in relation to earlier consignments suspected of duty evasion, and not procured coercively. The ROM application also highlighted issues related to non-cooperation, diversion of imported goods, and undervaluation of consignments.

Refund of Rs. 20 Lakhs:
The Tribunal, after considering the ROM application and submissions from both sides, found that the Rs. 20 lakhs were to be refunded. The Tribunal noted that the investigation in the case should not be stalled due to non-cooperation, but non-clearance of perishable goods could constitute undue influence or harassment. The Tribunal concluded that the Rs. 20 lakhs were coercively seized and should be returned to the appellants without delay. The ROM application's arguments regarding the voluntary nature of the payment and its relation to previous consignments were carefully considered and rejected.

Nature of Rs. 20 Lakhs Under Dispute:
The Tribunal made its own findings regarding the nature of the Rs. 20 lakhs under dispute. It observed that there was no application for the extension of the time limit in the lower authorities' proceedings regarding the seizure of the Rs. 20 lakhs. The Tribunal found no error apparent on record in the ROM application filed by the Revenue and emphasized that the facts recorded in the order were not incorrect. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's misinterpretation of the ROM application's scope and reiterated that the Rs. 20 lakhs were to be refunded based on the findings and submissions presented.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the ROM application, stating that no grounds were found to sustain it based on the detailed analysis and findings arrived at by the Bench. The application was therefore dismissed, affirming the decision regarding the refund of the Rs. 20 lakhs and other issues discussed in the judgment.