2015 (1) TMI 982 - HC - Customs

Restoration of appeal - appeal was dismissed for non compliance of pre-deposit order - Benefit of exemption under Notification No.26/2000-Cus. dated 1.3.2000 - Imposition of interest and penalty - Confiscation of goods u/s 111 - Held that - On facts, as presented by the Tribunal, we find no good reason to modify the order of the Tribunal ordering pre-deposit, as the factual aspect has to be gone into by the Tribunal on merits and the same cannot be agitated before this Court for the purpose of modification of the order of the Tribunal. However, taking note of the plea of Mr.R.Kannan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, we are inclined to extend the time to make the pre-deposit as ordered by the Tribunal. - The order of the Tribunal dated 05.08.2014 is modified to the effect that the appellant shall make a pre-deposit as ordered by the Tribunal in two equal instalments, first of which shall be deposited on or before 30th January, 2015 and the second instalment shall be deposited on or before 27th February, 2015 - order of the Tribunal dated 19.11.2014 dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of the stay order is set aside and the appeal is restored to the file of the Tribunal subject to the appellant deposits the first instalment within the stipulated period and gives an undertaking to deposit the balance amount within the stipulated period - Appeal disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of benefit of exemption under Notification No.26/2000-Cus.
2. Demand of duty, interest, and penalty against 25 Bills of Entry.
3. Appeal before the Tribunal with an application for waiver of pre-deposit.
4. Dispute regarding the authenticity of the certificate of country of origin.
5. Tribunal's order for pre-deposit and subsequent dismissal of the main appeal.
6. Appeal challenging the Tribunal's orders.

Analysis:

1. The appellant imported Poultry Feed Premix for Broiler Finisher under the benefit of exemption under Notification No.26/2000-Cus. However, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) found discrepancies in the certificate of origin, leading to a show-cause notice proposing denial of exemption, duty demand of Rs. 2,26,50,335/-, interest, and penalty. The Commissioner of customs upheld the denial of exemption, duty demand, and imposed a penalty under the Customs Act, 1962.

2. Aggrieved by the Commissioner's order, the assessee appealed before the Tribunal seeking waiver of pre-deposit. The appellant argued that the certificates were genuine, and the goods were cleared after verification by the proper officer. The Department contended that the goods did not meet the requirements of the Rules, as some were sourced from places other than Sri Lanka, thus justifying the denial of exemption.

3. The Tribunal noted a serious dispute of fact regarding the application of Rules and ordered a pre-deposit of Rs. 60,00,000/-, approximately 25% of the demand. Subsequently, the appellant filed an appeal challenging the Tribunal's order, leading to further appeals due to non-compliance with the pre-deposit order.

4. The High Court, after considering the facts, declined to modify the Tribunal's order on pre-deposit, emphasizing that the Tribunal must decide the factual aspect on merits. However, the Court extended the time for pre-deposit in two equal instalments. The Court set aside the Tribunal's dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance and restored the appeal subject to the appellant's compliance with the deposit conditions.

5. In conclusion, the High Court modified the Tribunal's orders on pre-deposit and appeal dismissal, providing specific deadlines for deposit and conditions for appeal restoration. The Court emphasized that failure to comply with the conditions would allow the Tribunal to proceed further. The appeals were decided in the above terms, with no costs awarded, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.