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 - 1999 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1999 (8) TMI 186 - AT - Customs

Issues Involved:
Customs duty demand confirmation, Central Excise duty confirmation, penalties imposition, goods confiscation, extension of validity period, premature demand of duties, role of Development Commissioner, appeal against adjudicating authority's order.

Customs Duty Demand Confirmation:
The case involved the confirmation of Customs duty demand against M/s. Vishal Footwear for contravention of specific Notifications. The duty amount, penalties, and confiscation of imported goods were all part of the confirmed demands.

Central Excise Duty Confirmation:
Central Excise duty was also confirmed against M/s. Vishal Footwear for non-fulfillment of conditions specified in the relevant Notifications related to the import of goods and commencement of production.

Extension of Validity Period and Premature Demand of Duties:
The issue of extension of the validity period for the unit in question was raised, with the Development Commissioner granting multiple extensions. The appellant argued that the demand for duties was premature as the Development Commissioner had not approved de-bonding of the unit and further extensions were being sought.

Role of Development Commissioner and Circular Interpretation:
The Ministry of Finance Circular highlighted the importance of the Development Commissioner's recommendation before confirming duty demands in cases of failure to export goods or closure of units benefiting from duty exemptions. The Circular emphasized the need for a definite conclusion by the Development Commissioner before duty demands could be upheld.

Decision and Conclusion:
The Tribunal considered the arguments presented and found merit in the appellant's submissions regarding the premature demand for duties. As there was no definite conclusion from the Development Commissioner and extensions were being sought, the duty demand, penalties, and confiscation order were set aside. The Tribunal allowed the appeals, dismissed the Miscellaneous application, and left the option open for the Adjudicating authority to take appropriate action based on the Development Commissioner's recommendations in the future.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates