9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 921 - AT - CustomsWaive of pre deposit - penalty for abetment - attempt to export of MOP (Muriate of Potash) - Held that - It is difficult to ascertain whether the applicants are involved in the offence or otherwise which rests on scrutiny/appreciation of evidences. However, the offer made by each of the applicants i.e. ₹ 25,000/- seems to be reasonable. Consequently, each of the applicants is directed to deposit ₹ 25,000 within eight weeks from today and report compliance. On deposit of the said amount, balance dues adjudged against each of the Applicants would stand waived and its recovery stayed during the pendency of the appeals. - Partial stay granted.
Issues: Waiver of pre-deposit of penalty
In this case, multiple applications were filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of penalties ranging from Rs. 2.00 Lakhs to Rs. 6.00 Lakhs under various sections of the Customs Act, 1962. The advocates for the appellants argued that despite findings against them by the Commissioner for attempting to export MOP (Muriate of Potash), the appellants had no role in the alleged offense. They highlighted the poor financial condition of the appellants who were employees of different firms, stating that the pre-deposit would cause undue hardship. Each advocate offered to deposit Rs. 25,000 against their respective appellants. The Revenue's representative reiterated the Commissioner's order discussing the role of each appellant. The Tribunal noted that it was challenging to determine the appellants' involvement at this stage without a thorough examination of evidence. However, considering the reasonable offer of Rs. 25,000 made by each appellant, the Tribunal directed them to deposit this amount within eight weeks. Upon compliance, the balance dues against each appellant would be waived, and recovery stayed during the appeal process. Failure to deposit would lead to dismissal of the appeals without further notice. The decision aimed to balance the interests of the appellants and the Revenue while ensuring a fair process.
|
