9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Stay application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and stay of recovery proceedings.
The judgment pertains to a stay application filed by the applicants seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty and stay of recovery proceedings as per the impugned order. The Counsel for the Appellants argued that the demand is time-barred, emphasizing that no allegation of suppression was made in the Show Cause Notice. Additionally, it was contended that the Show Cause-cum-Demand Notice was not served on the appellants directly but on their clearing agent, which, according to the Counsel, does not constitute valid service on the party. The Counsel cited the Supreme Court decision in the case of Collector of Cochin v. Trivandrum Rubber Works Limited, Chacki, to support this argument, specifically highlighting a portion of the judgment that clarifies the limited role of a clearing agent once goods have been cleared and delivered to the importer/owner. The Tribunal considered these arguments along with submissions from the Revenue's representative. After hearing both parties and evaluating the facts and legal precedents cited, the Tribunal found that there is a prima facie case in favor of the party seeking the stay. The Tribunal, in its decision, acknowledged the arguments presented by the Appellants' Counsel regarding the time-barred demand and the issue of valid service of the Show Cause-cum-Demand Notice. Citing the case law referred to during the proceedings, particularly the Supreme Court decision, the Tribunal concluded that the stay application should be allowed unconditionally. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the stay application, waiving the pre-deposit of duty and staying the recovery proceedings, based on the prima facie case found in favor of the party seeking the stay. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key arguments presented by the parties, the legal principles invoked, and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the decision to grant the stay application.
|
