Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2002 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2002 (12) TMI 169 - AT - Customs

Issues involved: Appeal against confirmation of demand due to non-submission of reconciliation statement under Project Import Regulations, 1986.

Summary:
The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai, comprising Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram and Shri J.H. Joglekar, considered the appeal after clearance from the Committee of Secretaries. The reconciliation statement, pivotal for the appeal, was found to have been filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and presented to the Tribunal. Despite waiving the pre-deposit of duty, the Tribunal proceeded to hear and dispose of the appeal with mutual consent.

The case revolved around the appellants' registration of a contract of goods under Project Import Regulations, 1986, for assessment under heading 98.01. Failure to submit the reconciliation statement within the stipulated period led to a show cause notice proposing deregistration of the contract and duty recovery. The Dy. Commissioner confirmed the demand, prompting the appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), who directed a 25% duty deposit. Subsequent modification requests were denied, leading to appeal rejection for non-compliance with Sec. 129E of the Customs Act, 1962.

Upon reviewing the case and noting the reconciliation statement's submission, the Tribunal deemed it necessary to reexamine the entire issue. Citing a similar precedent, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case for fresh decision, emphasizing the appellants' right to present documentary evidence and defend their case.

Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by remand, providing the appellants with an opportunity to substantiate their case and be heard in their defense before the original authority.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates