9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Stay applications against Order-in-original No. CC/SP-13/2007; Clearance of goods under kacha bills of entry without filing necessary permits; Imposition of penalty and redemption fine; Compliance with Public Notice No. 48/2003; Time-barred show cause notice; Confiscation of goods; Applicability of Sec. 124 of Customs Act, 1962. Analysis: The case involved multiple stay applications against Order-in-original No. CC/SP-13/2007, all arising from the same order. The main appellant had cleared goods under kacha bills of entry without filing required permits like sanitary import permit and NOC from Animal Quarantine and Certification Services. A show cause notice was issued, alleging misdeclaration and seeking penalty and redemption fine. The adjudicating authority imposed fines on the main importer and CHAs. The main appellant argued compliance with Public Notice No. 48/2003 and that the show cause notice was time-barred. The main appellant contended that they followed the law and that subsequent audits found no issues with the cleared entries. The appellant's representative argued that the show cause notice was time-barred and should have been decided in their favor. On the other hand, the respondent submitted that the appellant failed to provide necessary information regarding permits, leading to misdeclaration. They argued that even if goods were not available for confiscation, Sec. 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 would apply, justifying the confiscation ordered by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal considered the submissions and evidence presented. It noted that the appellant cleared goods under the direct delivery system using kacha bills of entry. After reviewing Public Notice No. 48/2003, it was found that the appellant followed the prescribed procedures for clearance. The Tribunal observed that the appellant did not deliberately withhold information and had a strong case for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the applications for waiver of pre-deposit and stayed the recovery until the appeals were disposed of. In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, acknowledging their compliance with the clearance procedures and granting a waiver of pre-deposit. The decision highlighted the importance of following prescribed protocols and procedures while importing goods and emphasized the need for timely compliance with regulatory requirements to avoid penalties and confiscation.
|
