2005 (3) TMI 598 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Compliance with Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 for waiver of remaining amounts and stay of recovery.
2. Duplicity in the conduct of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Compliance with Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962
The judgment deliberated on the compliance with Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 regarding the finalization of a Bill of Entry (BE) cleared on provisional assessment basis under Chapter 9801. The Tribunal noted that out of an amount of approximately Rs. 73 lakhs, Rs. 25 lakhs had already been deposited. Considering this, the Tribunal found sufficient compliance with the requirements of Section 129E to warrant the waiver of the remaining amounts and ordered the stay of recovery thereof.

Issue 2: Duplicity in the Conduct of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs
The judgment highlighted the duplicity in the conduct of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. It was observed that the Deputy Commissioner, through a letter dated 10-3-2005, requested the importers to pay government dues under the threat of initiating action under Section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962. However, it was revealed that the same officer had already issued an order on 9-3-2005 under Section 142 for recovery. The Tribunal expressed concern over this conduct, labeling it as 'Duplicity in Conduct.' Consequently, the detention notice issued under Section 142 was set aside. The Tribunal recommended bringing this matter to the attention of the Commissioner for appropriate action to maintain the integrity of the Customs service.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the compliance with statutory provisions for waiver of amounts and stay of recovery under the Customs Act, 1962. It also highlighted the importance of ethical conduct and transparency in the actions of Customs officials to uphold the reputation and integrity of the department. Both parties were granted the liberty to file an early hearing application, and the application was disposed of in the terms mentioned in the judgment.