2015 (2) TMI 869 - AT - Customs

Waiver of predeposit of duty - Cancellation of DRRC Licenses - misdeclaration of goods exported - Held that - As there is conflicting of views of the Tribunal on this issue, and since the Tribunal in the recent decision 2013 (6) TMI 637 - CESTAT NEW DELHI dismissed the Revenue's appeal, we waive the predeposit of duty along with interest and penalty and stay its recovery till disposal of appeal - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues: Application for waiver of predeposit of duty based on misdeclaration of goods in imported goods utilizing DFRC licences.

Analysis:
1. The applicant filed an application seeking waiver of predeposit of duty amounting to Rs. 50,39,604/- along with interest and penalty. The issue arose from the importation of goods cleared using DFRC licences obtained under TRA from a specific entity. The Jt. DGFT canceled the DFRC licences due to misdeclaration of exported goods. The applicant's advocate argued that they were bona fide purchasers of the license, thus the demand for duty beyond the limitation period should not stand. Reference was made to previous tribunal decisions such as Ramesh Enterprises Vs CC (Exports) Chennai and CC Vs Gopi Chand Krishan Kumar Bhatia to support the contention that extended limitation periods are not applicable in such cases where the importer had no knowledge of fraud or misrepresentation in obtaining the licenses.

2. The Revenue, represented by the Ld. AR, relied on precedents like KI International Ltd. Vs CC Chennai and CC (Preventive) Vs Aafloat Textiles (I) P. Ltd. to argue for the deposit of duty amount. The Tribunal noted conflicting decisions on the issue but emphasized the recent decision in CC Vs Gopi Chand Krishan Kumar Bhatia where the appeal was dismissed, indicating no merit in the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal referred to principles established in various judgments, including those of the Supreme Court and High Courts, to support its decision.

3. Given the conflicting views within the Tribunal and the recent dismissal of the Revenue's appeal, the Tribunal decided to waive the predeposit of duty, interest, and penalty while staying the recovery until the appeal's disposal. The stay application was allowed, and the matter was scheduled for an early hearing based on the Ld. AR's request.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the application for waiver of predeposit of duty concerning misdeclaration of goods in imported goods using DFRC licenses. The Tribunal considered arguments from both parties, cited relevant precedents, and ultimately decided to waive the predeposit and stay the recovery pending appeal disposal due to conflicting views within the Tribunal and the recent dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.