9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (6) TMI 664 - HC - CustomsWaiver of pre-deposit - Counsel submitted that the Appellant is nearly 69 years of age and has no subsisting business since the transaction in question related to the year 2003 Held that - opportunity should be granted to the Appellant to move the Tribunal afresh for reconsidering the issue of financial hardship on the basis of the material which is now placed on record, Tribunal directed to reconsider the question of financial hardship in the light of the material that may be produced by the Appellant, Petition is accordingly disposed of
Issues:
Appeal against Customs Tribunal order for waiver of pre-deposit under Section 129(E) of the Customs Act, 1962. Prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit and plea of financial hardship. Analysis: The High Court of Bombay heard an appeal arising from a Customs Tribunal order regarding a waiver of pre-deposit under Section 129(E) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal had noted a demand of &8377;15 lacs on the Appellant for a differential amount of duty related to the import of goods declared as Polyester Fabric. Upon further testing, it was discovered that there was a short payment of duty, leading to a review of the classification of the imported goods. The Tribunal, however, found no prima facie case and rejected the plea of financial hardship put forth by the Appellant. The High Court, after considering the submissions, concluded that the reasons given by the Tribunal were cogent and did not warrant interference at that stage under Article 226 of the Constitution. Nonetheless, the Court allowed the Appellant to submit additional evidence regarding financial hardship, as the Appellant had filed acknowledgment of income-tax returns showing a total income for specific assessment years. The Court granted the Appellant an opportunity to present this new evidence to the Tribunal for reconsideration of the issue of financial hardship. The Tribunal was instructed to review the matter within a week based on the new evidence provided by the Appellant. The Court disposed of the Petition with no order as to costs.
|
