2015 (2) TMI 1189 - HC - Customs

High Court admitted the appeal involving various questions of laws including - Filing of IGM by the vessel - Customs authorities did not at the relevant point of time insist upon the filing of an IGM and Bill of Entry for the vessel as goods ? - Demand of duty from the vessel - Confiscation u/s 111 of the customs act, 1962 - imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - claim of drawback of 95% of the duty paid on the vessel - claim of drawback of 95% of the duty paid on the vessel SalvareeSalvage Tug

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Admittance of appeals by importers on common questions and substantial questions of law.
2. Admittance of appeals by revenue on substantial questions of law.

Analysis:
1. The High Court of Bombay admitted the appeals by importers based on common questions and substantial questions of law. The appeals of the importers involved questions common to a previously admitted appeal, Customs Appeal (Lodging) No.33 of 2013. The court admitted all the appeals of the importers following the order of the Division Bench dated 26th September, 2013. The questions included whether the vessel was liable to confiscation under Section 111(f) of the Customs Act, 1962, and whether penalties were rightly imposed under Section 112(a) of the Act. Additionally, other appeals by importers were admitted on substantial questions of law regarding the requirement of filing a Bill of Entry and payment of duty on a foreign flag vessel brought into Indian waters temporarily for a specific salvage operation.

2. The appeals by the revenue were admitted on substantial questions of law related to the sustainability of Customs Duty demand in respect of the vessels in question. The court considered whether the CESTAT was correct in reducing penalties imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, and setting aside penalties imposed on individuals. The questions raised in the revenue appeals focused on the legality of the Customs Duty demand and the imposition of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962.

Overall, the judgment involved the admission of appeals by both importers and revenue on various substantial questions of law related to Customs Duty demands, penalties, confiscation of vessels, and the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The court granted liberty to parties to apply for an early date for the hearing, and the registry was directed to obtain records and proceedings from the Tribunal promptly for further proceedings.