2013 (10) TMI 505 - AT - Customs

Waiver of pre-deposit - Confiscation of a vessel which was imported - mis-declaration of vessel- Held that - The show cause notice itself records that the vessel was released after getting bank guarantees from M/s. Snow Drop Co. Ltd., M/s. Vihar Shipping Agency Pvt. Ltd., Shri Prakash Ajmera, Shri Rajesh Parekh, M/s. Shirdi Steel Traders, Shri Manish L. Vyas and M/s. Labdhi Shipping (Agency) Pvt. Ltd. who are all appellants before us. Since the amount of bank guarantee which is executed by these appellants is more than the amount of the penalties that have been imposed by the adjudicating authority and on an undertaking given by the ld. consultant that these bank guarantees will be kept alive till the disposal of appeals, stay granted.

Summary

Issues: Confiscation of imported vessel, Incorrect valuation, Penalties under Sections 114AA and 112(a)&(b) of Customs Act, 1962, Bank guarantees exceeding penalty amounts.

Confiscation of Imported Vessel:
The judgment pertains to stay petitions filed seeking the waiver of pre-deposit amounts related to penalties imposed under Sections 112(a) & (b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The issue revolves around the confiscation of a vessel imported into the country. The adjudicating authority contended that the importer, exporter, and shipping agents had mis-declared the vessel during importation, leading to the vessel being liable for confiscation and the confirmation of differential duty. The consultant representing the appellants argued that the differential duty had been paid as confirmed by lower authorities. The consultant disputed the correctness of the valuation and the vessel's confiscation. Additionally, the penalties imposed under Sections 114AA and 112(a)&(b) were challenged. The appellants had executed bank guarantees exceeding the liability amount, with the consultant asserting that these guarantees were still valid.

Waiver of Pre-Deposit and Stay of Recovery:
Upon review of the records, the Tribunal observed that the vessel had been released after the appellants provided bank guarantees exceeding the penalties imposed. The Tribunal noted that the amount covered by the bank guarantees surpassed the penalties levied by the adjudicating authority. The consultant assured that the bank guarantees would remain active until the appeal's disposal. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the applications for the waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amounts in all appeals. It also stayed the recovery of these penalties until the appeals were resolved, based on the sufficiency of the bank guarantees provided by the appellants.

This judgment underscores the significance of compliance with customs regulations during importation, the role of bank guarantees in securing penalty amounts, and the Tribunal's authority to grant waivers of pre-deposit and stay recovery pending appeal hearings.