2013 (8) TMI 657 - AT - Customs

Undervaluation of Imported Goods - Duty Demand -Violation of Principles of Natural Justice - Opportunity Given to the assesses - The assesses raised ground of violation of natural justice - Held that - The record enables to appreciate the total careless attitude of the appeal which was not vigilant to pursue remedy before the Tribunal even in second round of litigation interest of Revenue compelled to dismiss the stay applications Assesses were directed to deposit all the amounts demanded by adjudication order within 60 days of the receipt of the order - The assesse did not cooperate with the adjudicating authority and no reply to the show cause notice was filed - Several opportunities were granted but the assesses showered a defined attitude to law - Decided against assesses.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Absence of appellant during multiple adjournments.
2. Allegations of under-valuation of imported goods.
3. Violation of natural justice and collusion between parties.
4. Dismissal of stay applications and imposition of penalties.
5. Requirement to deposit demanded amounts within a specified timeframe.

Issue 1: Absence of appellant during multiple adjournments
The judgment outlines a series of adjournments due to the absence of the appellant despite prior notices and opportunities for hearings. The Tribunal, noting the impact on Revenue's interest, decided to proceed with the stay applications based on their own merit in the absence of the appellant.

Issue 2: Allegations of under-valuation of imported goods
The Revenue alleged that the imported goods, including Plasma TVs, were under-valued. The Tribunal highlighted the appellant's failure to cooperate with the adjudicating authority, leading to the conclusion of collusion between parties to evade customs duty through deliberate mis-declaration of values, causing losses to customs.

Issue 3: Violation of natural justice and collusion between parties
The adjudicating authority addressed the issue of violation of natural justice and collusion between parties in under-valuation of imports. The authority examined materials, including emails and export invoices, to establish the collusion, leading to the confirmation of demands against various entities and the imposition of penalties under relevant sections of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 4: Dismissal of stay applications and imposition of penalties
Due to the appellant's oblique motives, overseas inquiries against them, and their careless attitude, the Tribunal dismissed the stay applications. The failure of the appellant to pursue remedies before the Tribunal prejudiced Revenue's interests, leading to the dismissal of the applications and the direction to deposit the demanded amounts within a specified period.

Issue 5: Requirement to deposit demanded amounts within a specified timeframe
All three applicants were directed to deposit the entire demand raised by the adjudication order within 60 days of receiving the order and to ensure compliance by a specified date, emphasizing the seriousness of the financial obligations resulting from the judgment.

This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues of the appellant's absence, under-valuation of goods, violation of natural justice, dismissal of stay applications, and the requirement to deposit demanded amounts, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal proceedings and outcomes.