2015 (11) TMI 885 - AT - Customs

Waiver of pre deposit - Duty demand - appellants have not commenced production and not fulfilled the EPCG obligation - Held that - appellants have claimed before the assessing authorities that they have completed the export obligation to the extent of 50% out of the total obligation and sought local report from Chennai office for considering their request. Considering the above facts, and also considering the claim of 50% fulfilment of export obligation before DGFT, we direct the appellants to predeposit a sum of ₹ 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty lakhs only) within 8 weeks in two equalments, the first instalment shall be payable by 22.12.2015 and the second instalment shall be payable by 22.2.2016 and the file the compliance report before Commissioner (Appeals). Since the Commissioner (Appeals) has not decided the appeal on merits, on deposit of the above amount within the period prescribed, the LAA shall decide the issue on merits. Appeal is remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay application for hearing.
2. Non-compliance with predeposit order.
3. Appeal against Commissioner (Appeals) order.
4. Extension of export obligation time.
5. Contravention of Pollution Control Act.
6. Direction for closure of the appellant's unit.
7. Claim of export obligation fulfillment.
8. Predeposit amount and compliance report.

Stay Application:
The stay application was listed multiple times, with the advocate seeking time due to issues with DGFT. Eventually, the appeal itself was disposed of due to a narrow compass issue.

Non-compliance with Predeposit Order:
The appellant failed to comply with predeposit ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals), leading to dismissal of the appeal by LAA under section 129 of the Customs Act without hearing on merits.

Appeal Against Commissioner (Appeals) Order:
The appeal was filed against an order confirming customs duty forgone on imported goods due to non-commencement of production and fulfillment of EPCG obligation. The LAA ordered predeposit of a certain amount, which the appellant failed to comply with.

Extension of Export Obligation Time:
The appellant sought an extension of time for export obligation from DGFT, submitting various correspondences and RTI appeals. The Tribunal directed the appellant to predeposit a specific amount within a prescribed timeline for further consideration.

Contravention of Pollution Control Act:
The appellant's unit faced closure due to contravention of the Pollution Control Act, as directed by the Hon'ble High Court, impacting their operations and export obligations.

Claim of Export Obligation Fulfillment:
The appellant claimed to have fulfilled 50% of the export obligation and requested consideration based on this claim. The Tribunal directed the appellant to predeposit a specific amount based on this claim for further assessment.

Predeposit Amount and Compliance Report:
The Tribunal directed the appellant to predeposit a sum of Rupees Fifty lakhs in two installments within a specified timeline and file a compliance report before the Commissioner (Appeals) for further consideration, remanding the appeal with specific directions.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the legal judgment comprehensively, outlining the key aspects and decisions made by the Tribunal.