2003 (8) TMI 439 - Commission - Customs

Summary

Issues involved:
Settlement of customs duty liability, exemption claim, penalty imposition, interest waiver, immunity from prosecution, full waiver of interest, refund of excess deposit.

Settlement of Customs Duty Liability:
The judgment pertains to the settlement of customs duty liability for the case involving the import of Chinese origin pig hair bristles by the applicants. The applicants had claimed exemption from special additional duty (SAD) under a specific notification. However, they sold the goods in Delhi where no sales tax was chargeable, contrary to the exemption condition. The Settlement Commission directed the revenue to appropriate a specific amount against the duty liability admitted by the applicant.

Exemption Claim and Penalty Imposition:
The applicants sought full immunity from penalty and prosecution, along with a complete waiver of interest. The advocate representing the applicants argued that the delay in duty payment was due to a decision by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs and lack of clarification from Delhi Customs. The advocate cited various judgments to support the waiver request. However, Revenue opposed the waiver, stating that the applicants paid duty only after investigations started. The Commission considered the submissions and granted immunity from penalty and prosecution but found the applicants liable for interest payment.

Interest Waiver and Refund of Excess Deposit:
Regarding interest, the Commission noted that the applicants violated the exemption notification by selling goods in Delhi. The Commission referred to a previous order and held that interest should be charged on the amount of wrongly availed exemption. However, interest in excess of 10% was waived, and the applicants were directed to calculate and pay the interest within a specified period. The excess amount deposited by the applicant was to be refunded by Revenue within 30 days.

Immunity from Prosecution and Final Settlement Terms:
The Commission granted immunity from prosecution and fine under the Customs Act to the applicants. The settlement terms included the final duty liability amount, immunity from prosecution, penalty waiver, and the payment of interest within a specified timeframe. The settlement was subject to certain statutory provisions and would be void if obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.

Conclusion:
The judgment by the Settlement Commission addressed the settlement of customs duty liability, exemption claim, penalty imposition, interest waiver, and refund of excess deposit in a case involving the sale of imported goods in violation of exemption conditions. The Commission granted immunity from prosecution and penalty, while directing the payment of interest and refunding the excess deposit. The decision emphasized compliance with statutory provisions and the consequences of fraudulent practices.