2003 (9) TMI 433 - Commission - Customs

Issues Involved:
1. Differential duty liability
2. Fulfillment of export obligation
3. Immunity from interest, penalty, fine, and prosecution

Detailed Analysis:

1. Differential Duty Liability:

The main applicant, M/s. Motorola India Private Limited, obtained advance licenses for importing components to manufacture and export 'Monopoly' model Pagers. The SCN issued by ADG, DRI alleged that components imported under License No. 07001273, dated 14-10-97, were not fully utilized in the intended export product but were instead used in other models, leading to a proposed differential duty demand of Rs. 75,82,356/-. The main applicant initially admitted to a differential duty liability of Rs. 17,40,535/-, which was later revised to Rs. 32,77,190/-. Ultimately, during the final hearing, the applicant accepted the entire differential duty of Rs. 75,82,356/- as demanded in the SCN.

2. Fulfillment of Export Obligation:

The applicant admitted that due to demand recession and other factors, they could not fulfill the export obligation of 70,000 Pagers, managing to export only 39,502 units. They paid Rs. 40,53,457/- along with interest of Rs. 16,72,240/- and obtained a certificate of discharge of export obligation from JDGFT, Bangalore. However, further investigations by DRI led to the current proceedings, where the applicant ultimately conceded to the full differential duty liability.

3. Immunity from Interest, Penalty, Fine, and Prosecution:

- Penalty and Prosecution: The Settlement Commission granted immunity from penalty and prosecution under the Customs Act, 1962, to the main applicant and the co-applicants. This decision was based on the applicant's cooperation and full disclosure of duty liability during the proceedings.

- Interest: The Commission decided that the main applicant would bear a simple interest of 10% per annum on the settled duty amount of Rs. 75,82,356/- from the due date until actual payment. Immunity was granted from any interest exceeding this 10% rate.

- Fine: Since the SCN did not propose any confiscation, the Commission found no need to grant immunity from fines under the Customs Act.

- Prosecution under Other Central Acts: The request for immunity from prosecution under all central Acts was deemed irrelevant as there was no indication of any proposal for such prosecution.

Conclusion:

The Settlement Commission settled the case under Section 127C(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, with the following terms and conditions:

1. The total differential duty liability of Rs. 75,82,356/- was appropriated from the amount already paid by the main applicant.
2. Immunity from penalty and prosecution under the Customs Act, 1962, was granted to the main applicant and co-applicants.
3. The main applicant was required to pay a 10% simple interest per annum on the settled duty amount, with immunity from any excess interest.
4. The immunities granted are subject to withdrawal if any material particulars are found to have been withheld or false evidence provided.

The applicants were reminded of the provisions under sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 127H of the Customs Act, 1962, regarding the withdrawal of immunities.

← Previous Next →