9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 1364 - AT - CustomsImports from Pakistan - Prohibition imposed on imported goods - withdrawal of exemption notification and/or items wise increased rate of duty - appellants were asked to pay duty in terms of Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019 as the goods have been imported from Pakistan - HELD THAT - Admittedly, as per the report submitted by the ld. A.R. dt. 05.09.2019, the goods have entered in Customs area by 17 13 hours on 16.09.2019 and the bills of entry were filed by 18 23 hours on 16.09.2019, which is well before the time of issuance of Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019; therefore, the appellants are not liable to pay duty in terms of above said notification. The Hon ble High Court in the case of M/S RASRASNA FOOD PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2019 (8) TMI 1400 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT has held that the importers are liable to pay duty as the duty was applicable at the time of filing of bills of entry couple with the facts that of the imported goods having entered in the Territory of India on 16.02.2019, prior to the issuance of the Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Appeal against demand of duty based on Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019 for goods imported from Pakistan. Analysis: The appellants imported various goods from Pakistan, including cement, ajwain, goggles, and dry dates. The Notification No. 05/2019-Cus dt. 16.02.2019 imposed a 200% import duty on goods from Pakistan, significantly increasing the IGST rate. The appellants, registered with DGFT and CGST, filed bills of entry on the same day the goods entered Indian Territory, before the notification was issued at 8:30 pm. The issue revolved around whether duty was payable based on the duty rate at the time of filing the bills of entry or the increased rate post-notification. The appellants argued that since the bills of entry were filed before the notification, they were not liable to pay duty as per the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in a similar case. Conversely, the authorized representative relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court to assert the duty liability of the appellants. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court's judgment emphasized the importance of both the presentation of the bill of entry and the arrival of goods in determining the duty rate. It differentiated scenarios based on the timing of bill presentation and goods arrival, concluding that if both occurred before the notification, the increased duty rate could not be applied. The judgment highlighted that the notification aimed to discourage imports from Pakistan, not penalize Indian importers, and retrospective application of the increased duty rate was impermissible. Based on the High Court's ruling and the timing of bill submission and goods entry, the appellate tribunal held that the appellants were not liable to pay duty as per the increased rate introduced by the notification. The tribunal set aside the impugned orders and directed authorities to release the goods within seven days of the order communication, granting relief to the appellants.
|
