2003 (2) TMI 286 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the effect of settling a matter under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 on related proceedings.
2. Application for modification of the Tribunal's order from "appeal abated" to "appeal allowed."
3. Relevance and applicability of judgments by the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in similar cases.
4. Analysis of the provisions of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 regarding the withdrawal of appeals.

Issue 1 - Interpretation of Settlement under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme:
The Tribunal accepted the advocate's contention that when a co-noticee settles a matter under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, proceedings against the appellant abate. Citing judgments by the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court, the Tribunal concluded that the proceedings come to an end when a noticee settles the matter, leading to the abatement of related appeals.

Issue 2 - Application for Modification of Tribunal's Order:
The appellant sought modification of the Tribunal's order from stating that the appeal abated to stating that the appeal is allowed. However, the Tribunal clarified that its order merely reflected the High Court's judgment, which settled the issue and directed the Tribunal to formalize the end of proceedings. The Tribunal's order could not go beyond the High Court's decision that the proceedings had concluded.

Issue 3 - Relevance of Judgments by the Bombay High Court and Supreme Court:
The Tribunal analyzed the judgments cited by the appellant's counsel, emphasizing that the Supreme Court's decision supported the view that proceedings are settled against all noticees when a declaration is made by one person. However, the Tribunal found no basis in the judgments to support the refund of any deposits made in such situations.

Issue 4 - Provisions of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998:
The Tribunal highlighted the provisions of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, specifically noting that appeals filed by declarants are deemed withdrawn. This withdrawal extends to other individuals whose cases are settled under the scheme. Citing the Supreme Court's observation, the Tribunal emphasized that deeming provisions must be followed through to their logical conclusion, leading to the correct conclusion that the appeal had abated.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the application for modification, affirming that the appeal had abated in accordance with the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, and the relevant legal precedents.