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 + SC Customs - 1988 (8) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1988 (8) TMI 109 - SC - Customs


  1. 2023 (10) TMI 1208 - SC
  2. 2019 (9) TMI 788 - SC
  3. 2019 (4) TMI 1754 - SC
  4. 2011 (9) TMI 957 - SC
  5. 2010 (10) TMI 932 - SC
  6. 2008 (2) TMI 850 - SC
  7. 2007 (9) TMI 274 - SC
  8. 2004 (4) TMI 294 - SC
  9. 1999 (4) TMI 601 - SC
  10. 1992 (9) TMI 354 - SC
  11. 2024 (8) TMI 1030 - HC
  12. 2024 (3) TMI 650 - HC
  13. 2023 (12) TMI 419 - HC
  14. 2022 (10) TMI 893 - HC
  15. 2022 (7) TMI 608 - HC
  16. 2022 (5) TMI 9 - HC
  17. 2022 (4) TMI 1210 - HC
  18. 2022 (5) TMI 1189 - HC
  19. 2020 (3) TMI 1260 - HC
  20. 2019 (11) TMI 1430 - HC
  21. 2019 (6) TMI 1336 - HC
  22. 2019 (5) TMI 4 - HC
  23. 2018 (11) TMI 522 - HC
  24. 2018 (10) TMI 145 - HC
  25. 2018 (9) TMI 836 - HC
  26. 2018 (11) TMI 1515 - HC
  27. 2018 (7) TMI 1609 - HC
  28. 2017 (11) TMI 484 - HC
  29. 2017 (6) TMI 964 - HC
  30. 2017 (4) TMI 1000 - HC
  31. 2017 (5) TMI 771 - HC
  32. 2017 (2) TMI 859 - HC
  33. 2016 (11) TMI 165 - HC
  34. 2016 (7) TMI 1307 - HC
  35. 2016 (7) TMI 365 - HC
  36. 2016 (7) TMI 423 - HC
  37. 2016 (5) TMI 672 - HC
  38. 2016 (4) TMI 12 - HC
  39. 2016 (2) TMI 245 - HC
  40. 2016 (1) TMI 428 - HC
  41. 2015 (11) TMI 959 - HC
  42. 2015 (9) TMI 1743 - HC
  43. 2015 (7) TMI 304 - HC
  44. 2014 (11) TMI 536 - HC
  45. 2014 (8) TMI 845 - HC
  46. 2014 (5) TMI 1061 - HC
  47. 2014 (3) TMI 880 - HC
  48. 2015 (9) TMI 775 - HC
  49. 2014 (2) TMI 403 - HC
  50. 2013 (5) TMI 806 - HC
  51. 2013 (4) TMI 101 - HC
  52. 2014 (5) TMI 504 - HC
  53. 2014 (9) TMI 372 - HC
  54. 2012 (11) TMI 879 - HC
  55. 2012 (4) TMI 213 - HC
  56. 2012 (11) TMI 558 - HC
  57. 2011 (7) TMI 385 - HC
  58. 2011 (7) TMI 228 - HC
  59. 2010 (10) TMI 750 - HC
  60. 2010 (2) TMI 1074 - HC
  61. 2009 (11) TMI 649 - HC
  62. 2009 (10) TMI 45 - HC
  63. 2009 (9) TMI 392 - HC
  64. 2009 (6) TMI 222 - HC
  65. 2009 (3) TMI 1092 - HC
  66. 2008 (3) TMI 213 - HC
  67. 2007 (2) TMI 592 - HC
  68. 2006 (1) TMI 138 - HC
  69. 2004 (6) TMI 604 - HC
  70. 2004 (3) TMI 750 - HC
  71. 2003 (10) TMI 70 - HC
  72. 2002 (8) TMI 818 - HC
  73. 2002 (7) TMI 770 - HC
  74. 1999 (9) TMI 926 - HC
  75. 1999 (3) TMI 84 - HC
  76. 1998 (9) TMI 94 - HC
  77. 1997 (6) TMI 34 - HC
  78. 1997 (2) TMI 534 - HC
  79. 1996 (6) TMI 92 - HC
  80. 1990 (11) TMI 165 - HC
  81. 1989 (2) TMI 125 - HC
  82. 2023 (10) TMI 123 - AT
  83. 2023 (3) TMI 516 - AT
  84. 2019 (5) TMI 740 - AT
  85. 2018 (2) TMI 13 - AT
  86. 2017 (7) TMI 867 - AT
  87. 2016 (12) TMI 82 - AT
  88. 2015 (2) TMI 421 - AT
  89. 2014 (6) TMI 27 - AT
  90. 2014 (4) TMI 1054 - AT
  91. 2014 (2) TMI 1132 - AT
  92. 2015 (11) TMI 873 - AT
  93. 2013 (8) TMI 234 - AT
  94. 2013 (9) TMI 169 - AT
  95. 2013 (1) TMI 199 - AT
  96. 2012 (10) TMI 102 - AT
  97. 2012 (7) TMI 704 - AT
  98. 2010 (11) TMI 263 - AT
  99. 2010 (6) TMI 167 - AT
  100. 2010 (6) TMI 214 - AT
  101. 2010 (2) TMI 281 - AT
  102. 2009 (9) TMI 707 - AT
  103. 2009 (8) TMI 1003 - AT
  104. 2009 (7) TMI 105 - AT
  105. 2009 (6) TMI 507 - AT
  106. 2009 (5) TMI 47 - AT
  107. 2006 (7) TMI 263 - AT
  108. 2005 (12) TMI 251 - AT
  109. 2005 (11) TMI 203 - AT
  110. 2002 (10) TMI 116 - AT
  111. 2001 (2) TMI 298 - AT
  112. 1998 (8) TMI 135 - AT
  113. 1998 (7) TMI 118 - AT
  114. 1993 (5) TMI 59 - AT
Issues:
1. Appellants charged with alleged offenses under Customs Act and Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.
2. Dispute over statements obtained under duress.
3. Imposition of penalties by the Customs Authorities.
4. Appellate Tribunal's decision on deposit of penalty for appeal under Section 129E of the Act.
5. Appellants' contention of financial inability to deposit penalty.
6. Applicability of legal provisions regarding appeal rights and deposit conditions.
7. Judicial discretion in dispensing with deposit conditions.
8. Comparison with previous legal judgments on appeal rights and deposit requirements.

Analysis:
1. The appellants were charged with offenses under the Customs Act and the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act upon their arrival in India in 1983. Allegations were made regarding the manner in which statements were obtained from the appellants by the Enforcement authorities, with claims of duress and the use of third-degree methods.

2. While one appellant was discharged in the FERA proceedings due to lack of evidence, the other appellant's case was pending adjudication. However, penalties were imposed on both appellants by the Additional Collector of Customs based on alleged involvement in illegal foreign exchange activities, leading to appeals to the Appellate Tribunal under Section 129A of the Act.

3. The Appellate Tribunal, after considering the appellants' financial situation and the penalty amount, declined to further reduce the deposit required for the appeal under Section 129E of the Act. The appellants argued their inability to deposit the amount, which they claimed would render their right of appeal illusory.

4. The legal provision of Section 129E of the Act mandates the deposit of duty or penalty pending an appeal, with a provision for the Appellate Authority to dispense with the deposit in cases of undue hardship. The Tribunal's decision to reject the appellants' request for reduction was based on various factors, including the prima facie case against the appellants and the history of the appeals.

5. The right to appeal is considered a statutory right that can be subject to conditions imposed by the law. The Tribunal's decision to uphold the deposit requirement was deemed a valid exercise of judicial discretion, ensuring compliance with legal provisions and safeguarding the interest of revenue.

6. Previous legal judgments were cited to distinguish between substantive appeal rights and procedural requirements. The court emphasized that the right to appeal is not absolute and can be circumscribed by conditions set forth in the law, such as the deposit requirement under Section 129E of the Act.

7. Ultimately, the court rejected the appellants' argument that the rejection of their appeal due to non-compliance with the deposit condition was improper. The decision was upheld based on a thorough consideration of relevant facts and legal provisions, ensuring the purpose of the law to compel compliance and uphold the statutory appeal process.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates