9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (8) TMI 853 - AT - CustomsExport of non standard goods - The issue involved in this case was regarding the export of non-standard goods as received from an EOU by an SEZ Held that - The issue involved in the case needs to be gone into detail - It was to be appreciated that as to whether the duty liability on the SEZ would be customs duty or Central Excise duty and also how the poor quality of consignment entered into SEZ. Waiver of pre deposit of Penalty u/s 112 and 114 - applications for the waiver of pre-deposit of the balance amounts involved were allowed and recovery stayed decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of duty, fine, and penalties in relation to export of non-standard goods from an EOU to an SEZ. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad, delivered by Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. H.K. Thakur, JJ., addressed the issue of waiver of pre-deposit of amounts related to a case involving M/s. Siddhanath Shipping and M/s. Shakti Forwarders Pvt. Limited. The appellant sought the waiver of duty, fine, and penalties totaling Rs. 57,47,210/-, Rs. 1,50,000/-, Rs. 60,00,000/-, and Rs. 15,00,000/- respectively. The primary issue revolved around the export of non-standard goods from an EOU to an SEZ, with legal arguments concerning the liability of SEZ to pay Customs duty and challenges to the adjudicating authority's findings on the consignment quality switch. The appellant had already deposited Rs. 20 Lakhs during the investigation, contending it was sufficient for the appeal hearing. Upon hearing both sides and reviewing the records, the Tribunal acknowledged the complexity of the case, necessitating a detailed examination. Key considerations included determining whether the duty liability on the SEZ constituted customs duty or Central Excise duty and investigating how the substandard consignment entered the SEZ. Recognizing the time-intensive nature of these issues, the Tribunal deemed the appellant's existing deposit substantial for the appeal proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the applications for the waiver of pre-deposit for the remaining amounts in both cases and ordered a stay on recovery until the appeals were resolved. The decision aimed to facilitate a thorough examination of the intricate matters at hand while ensuring fairness in the appellate process.
|
