2015 (8) TMI 437 - HC - Customs

Waiver of Pre-deposit duty Appeal By impugned order, Tribunal held that appellant failed to establish any merit in appeal filed for waiver of pre-deposit of custom duty demanded Held that - Settled position of law that application for waiver of pre-deposit, relevant considerations for Tribunal was whether appellant made out prima facie case and whether any financial hardship was established So far as question of prima facie case was concerned, Director - STPI passed order against appellant which binds authorities under Customs Act and that in view of said order of Director, appellant could not make out prima facie case in their favour Appellant failed to establish not only prima facie case but also financial hardship before Tribunal In such circumstances Tribunal ordered deposit of duty demanded Therefore, no merit in appeal found Appeal dismissed Decided against Assesse.

Issues:
- Appeal against the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for waiver of pre-deposit of customs duty.
- Failure to establish merit in the appeal and financial hardship.
- Appellant being a 100% export-oriented unit facing proceedings for not achieving export obligations.
- Tribunal's consideration of prima facie case and financial hardship for waiver of pre-deposit.
- Lack of documentary evidence to prove financial difficulties by the appellant.
- Tribunal's order directing the appellant to deposit the duty demanded.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, where the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit the customs duty demanded due to the failure to establish merit in the appeal and financial hardship. The appellant, a 100% export-oriented unit, faced proceedings for not meeting export obligations. Although a writ petition was filed against the Director's order, no interim relief was obtained. The customs authorities confirmed a demand of &8377; 33,73,237/- towards customs duty and &8377; 9,741/- as central excise duty. The Tribunal considered the appellant's application for waiver of pre-deposit, emphasizing the need to establish a prima facie case and financial hardship. The Tribunal noted the lack of documentary evidence regarding financial difficulties presented by the appellant, leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to the failure to prove both a prima facie case and financial hardship.

The Tribunal's decision was based on the principle that the appellant must demonstrate a prima facie case and financial hardship for the waiver of pre-deposit. The Tribunal referenced the Director's order against the appellant and the absence of interlocutory relief from the Court, concluding that the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case. Regarding financial hardship, the Tribunal highlighted the lack of documentary evidence provided by the appellant to support their claim of financial difficulties. Despite the appellant's attempt to introduce documents before the Court to prove financial distress, the Court declined to consider them due to the appellant's failure to present such evidence before the Tribunal. Consequently, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the appeal and order the deposit of the duty demanded.

In conclusion, the Court found no merit in the appeal, as the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case and financial hardship before the Tribunal. The lack of documentary evidence to support financial difficulties and the failure to provide explanations for this omission led to the dismissal of the appeal. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to direct the appellant to deposit the duty demanded, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

← Previous Next →