9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against rejection of declared value, confiscation of goods, imposition of penalty, waiver of pre-deposit, reconsideration of stay order, jurisdictional ground of appeal.
Summary: The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, dealt with an appeal where the Deputy Commissioner of Customs rejected the declared value of goods, leading to confiscation and penalty imposition. The appellant appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) seeking waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. The Commissioner directed pre-deposit under Section 129E of the Customs Act, which the appellant did not comply with. The appeal was dismissed for non-compliance. The appellant argued that Section 113 of the Customs Act was not applicable as the goods were already exported, citing relevant case laws. They also contended that the modification application grounds were not considered by the appellate authority, which had the power to reconsider the stay order. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of both the department's and appellant's appeals together, considering jurisdictional issues and granting waiver of pre-deposit. The present appeal was allowed for remand, emphasizing disposal on merits without pre-deposit. In conclusion, the Tribunal remanded the case for the Commissioner (Appeals) to review the appeals in accordance with the law and principles of natural justice, without insisting on pre-deposit, and to consider the department's appeal simultaneously.
|
