9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l purchase invoice of the lessor of the barge as the issue to be settled is a dispute between the Customs Department and the petitioners as formulated in the show cause notice. The petitioners having accepted the valuation made in the show cause notice and the report of the Commissioner of Customs made before the Settlement Commission, no interference in respect of valuation of the barge is called for. When the entire duty liability and interest as demanded in the show cause notice has been paid by the assessee, it is not possible for the Settlement Commission to conclude that the petitioners have not cooperated or not disclosed full and true facts in their application for settlement. However, it must be pointed out that in the facts existi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... December, 2006, the petitioners had imported a barge claiming the benefit of Notification No. 27/2002-Cus., dated 1 March, 2002. The Bill of Entry filed by the petitioners was provisionally assessed pending re-export of the barge. The value of the barge was disclosed at US $ 64,40,750 equivalent to assessable value of ₹ 29.24 crores. Subsequently the barge was re-exported on 17 August, 2007 and the customs duty on re-export came to be charged at ₹ 82.07 lakhs in terms of Notification No. 27/2002. (b) Thereafter in the course of investigation, it was found that the value of the barge was in fact US $ 69,98,667 as the insured value of the barge. This led to issue of a show cause notice dated 17 February, 2012 demanding the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same and insisted that the purchase invoice by the foreign exporter should be produced. The petitioners did not produce the same as it was their case that the amount demanded from them by the Customs Department in the show cause notice is not being contested by the petitioners or the Customs Department and case should be settled on the basis of the show cause notice dated 17 February, 2012. The Settlement Commission did not accept the same and was of the view that as the barge was owned by a related party, which had leased out the barge to them, the petitioners should have on their own declared the full value of the barge as purchased by the related party (lessor of the barge) in their application for settlement. In above circumstances, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court should interfere with the order in exercise of judicial review. It is emphasised that in spite of repeated demands made by the Settlement Commission, the petitioners had not produced the purchase invoice dated 16 August, 2006 before the Commission. Therefore, on the facts before it, the Settlement Commission was justified in coming to the conclusion that there was no true and full disclosure made by the petitioners and that the petitioners had not cooperated with the Settlement Commission. Therefore, it is submitted that the petition be dismissed. 6. We have considered the submissions. It cannot be disputed that an applicant before the Settlement Commission is obliged to make a full and true disclosure in its application and als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore us but not before the Settlement Commission on the petitioners advocate raising a legal issue that the same is not relevant for the purpose of settling the dispute. Thus, the entire issue was disposed of on an issue of law. We are of the view that the applicant is required to make a full and true disclosure and also cooperate with the Commission. However, as the petitioners have now provided the purchase invoice dated 16 August 2006, it would be appropriate for the Commission to consider the same and pass an order. 8. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 28 September, 2012 is set aside and the case is restored to the Settlement Commission. The Settlement Commission shall consider the invoice dated 16 August, 2006 and pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
