2016 (5) TMI 670 - AT - Customs

Demand of Central Excise duty and Customs duty - Raw materials imported duty-free for export of the finished goods - diversion of consignments of goods meant for export to domestic area - Held that - adjudicating authority has not considered the explanations given and the defence taken by the appellants before him while deciding the case. It has not even recorded a single line of reasoning as to why he is not accepting the defence raised by the appellants. It is also to be noted that there is no reasoning given as to how the adjudicating authority has come to a conclusion that bulk drugs cleared from M/s Tini Pharma Ltd. were not exported but something else was exported in respect of the consignments which were already cleared for export. In the absence of any reasoning or the findings, it is not possible for the Tribunal to go into the issue raised. In the interest of justice, it is found that the impugned order needs to be set aside and the matter be remitted to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice. - Appeal disposed of by way of remand

Summary

Issues:
Diversion of consignments of goods meant for export to domestic area and consequent demand of Central Excise duty and Customs duty on imported raw materials.

Analysis:
The judgment dealt with multiple appeals interconnected by the same question of law regarding the diversion of goods meant for export to the domestic area and the subsequent demand for Central Excise duty and Customs duty on imported raw materials. The main appellant had imported raw materials duty-free for export but was found to have diverted the goods to the domestic market. The adjudicating authority did not provide reasoning or findings to support the demand for duties on the goods not exported and allegedly diverted. The appellants raised various defences and explanations, but the authority did not consider them while deciding the case. The Tribunal found the lack of reasoning problematic and set aside the impugned order, remitting the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration following the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal clarified that it had not made any observations on the merits of the case, leaving all issues open for both parties to address before the adjudicating authority.

In conclusion, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were remanded to the adjudicating authority for a fresh review. The amounts deposited by the appellants during the proceedings were to remain with the Government of India. The judgment emphasized the importance of providing proper reasoning and considering all defences raised by the parties in such cases involving duty demands and diversion of goods meant for export.