9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Modification of tribunal order regarding pre-deposit of duty. 2. Interpretation of statutory instructions issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs under the Customs Act, 1962. 3. Application of circulars and trade notices issued by various Collectorates. 4. Consideration of similar cases and rulings by other benches. 5. Jurisdiction of adjudicating authorities in cases involving collusion, misstatements, or suppression of facts. Analysis: 1. The judgment deals with a miscellaneous application seeking modification of an order directing the petitioner to pre-deposit the entire duty as per the Collector's order. The petitioner argued for modification based on pure law and statutory instructions issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs under the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner highlighted that show cause notices for duties should be issued by Collectors only for a period of five years in cases of collusion or misstatements, as per the Board's circular and trade notices issued by various Collectorates. 2. The petitioner's counsel emphasized that the Board's circular and trade notices mandated that show cause notices for duties involving collusion or misstatements should be issued and adjudicated by Collectors only. The counsel cited instances of similar cases being remanded for de novo adjudication based on the Board's circular and concessions made by the Special Bench. The argument focused on the necessity of following statutory instructions and maintaining consistency in decision-making. 3. The respondent, represented by the learned SDR, acknowledged the existence of previous Board circulars directing that show cause notices involving collusion or misstatements should be handled by Collectors. The respondent argued that the matter should be remanded to the concerned authority for disposal in accordance with the law, citing a ruling of the Special Bench. 4. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented and noted the Board's circular regarding the issuance of show cause notices and adjudication involving longer periods as per the Customs Act and the Central Excises and Salt Act. The Tribunal also examined trade notices issued by different Collectorates in alignment with the Board's circular. Reference was made to a ruling by the North Regional Bench in a similar case, where the matter was remanded for de novo adjudication following the Board's circular. 5. The Tribunal, without expressing an opinion on the merit of the issue, set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication. The Tribunal granted a waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, emphasizing the need for adherence to statutory instructions and principles of natural justice. The judgment clarified that the appellant had the liberty to raise all relevant issues under the law during the de novo adjudication process.
|
