2002 (10) TMI 738 - Commission - Customs

Settlement Commission - Jurisdiction of - Duty liability - Settlement of case - Application for

Summary

Issues:
1. Duty demand on excess import of goods under DEEC Scheme.
2. Jurisdiction of Settlement Commission in cases involving default in export obligation.
3. Immunities sought by the applicants.

Analysis:
1. The judgment dealt with a case where an applicant, a Public Ltd. Company, imported goods under an Advance Licence but failed to fulfill the export obligation, leading to a duty demand of Rs. 24,05,470/- on excess import of goods. The applicant filed an application seeking settlement, admitting the duty liability and expressing willingness to admit the entire demand of Rs. 35,01,573/-. The Commission examined the case records and submissions, ultimately settling the case for the admitted amount of Rs. 35,01,573/-, allowing adjustments and directing payment of the remaining balance within 30 days.

2. The Commission addressed the issue of its jurisdiction in cases involving default in export obligation under Advance Licence/EPCG Scheme. The Revenue cited Ministry's Circular No. 53, questioning the Settlement Commission's authority in such cases. However, the Commission referred to previous judgments, including the case of Bell Granito Ceramica Ltd., to establish that EPCG cases fall within its purview under Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commission analyzed various aspects, including the interpretation of statutory provisions and judicial pronouncements, to assert its jurisdiction over such cases.

3. The applicants sought immunities from fine, penalty, and prosecution, citing their cooperation and full disclosure of duty liability during the proceedings. The Commission, considering their cooperation and disclosure, granted immunity from fine, penalty, and prosecution under the Customs Act, 1962, and the Indian Penal Code. However, the order specified that it would be void if obtained through fraud or misrepresentation of facts. The judgment highlighted the importance of cooperation and disclosure in seeking immunities from legal consequences in settlement proceedings.