9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Application to dispense with pre-deposit of duty amount and penalty; Allegation of suppression and correct assessment of duty liability.
Summary: Issue 1: Application for pre-deposit of duty amount and penalty The appellant, a 100% EOU, de-bonded imported capital goods after obtaining necessary permission. Two bills of entry were filed, one for Customs duty under EPCG scheme and the other claiming concessional rate. The demand was confirmed against the second bill of entry for additional duties. The appellant argued that the show cause notice was time-barred as bills of entry were filed in 2003 and duly assessed. The Advocate contended that the allegation of suppression was not valid as the correct duty rate was claimed as per their understanding. The onus was on Customs officers to assess duty liability at the time of filing. Issue 2: Allegation of suppression and correct assessment of duty liability The SDR argued that the appellant failed to pay CVD and additional customs duty, contravening the law and justifying the longer period of limitation invoked by the adjudicating authority. However, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant that the demand raised in the show cause notice was indeed time-barred. The Bill of Entry was assessed by the proper officer without pointing out the need for additional duties. The lack of objection during assessment indicated a lack of mala fide intention or suppression on the part of the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that it was a case of mistake and lack of knowledge, making the extended period unavailable to the Revenue. In conclusion, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed on the ground of limitation itself.
|
