9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Waiver of pre-deposit of duty demand for imported parts of cellular phones under Notification No 21/2002-Cus.; Reopening of assessment without challenging the order; Essential characteristics of imported goods; Financial hardship plea; Applicability of legal judgments on merits.
In this case, the appellants imported parts of cellular phones under 18 Bills of Entry and were granted the benefit of Notification No 21/2002-Cus. However, later show cause notices were issued alleging that the imported goods were not merely parts but had the essential character of cellular phones, thus not entitled to the benefit of the said Notification. The appellants sought waiver of pre-deposit of duty demand amounting to Rs. 2,52,17,948. The Department argued that the assessment could be reopened under Section 28 even without challenging the original order, citing the ruling in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. National Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. The Tribunal considered the arguments and legal precedents presented by both sides. The appellants contended that they had invested significantly to manufacture fully finished cellular phones, and the Revenue had not specified why the parts were not entitled to the exemption. The learned Counsel emphasized that the appellants had a strong prima facie case in their favor on merits, citing a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The Revenue, on the other hand, argued that the parts imported had the essential characteristics of cellular phones and should not be granted the benefit of the exemption. They also highlighted the significant amount involved, urging the Tribunal to safeguard Revenue interest. After careful consideration, the Tribunal noted the merits in the arguments presented by the appellants. Referring to the legal precedent set by the Apex Court in the case of Priya Blue Industries, the Tribunal held that if the assessment had been finalized and not challenged, it could not be reopened by raising fresh grounds. The Tribunal found that the appellants had a strong prima facie case on merits, and therefore, granted full waiver of pre-deposit of the disputed amount. The stay application was allowed, preventing the Revenue from recovering the disputed amount until the appeal's disposal. The Tribunal scheduled an out-of-turn hearing due to the significant amount involved in the matter.
|
