9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letter dated 22nd June, 2016 addressed by the office of the Commission to the Petitioner, directing them to deposit interest immediately. Petitioner, in compliance thereof paid the interest. These were issues which required the Commission to hear the Petitioner, before holding/ communicating that there is non-compliance with the order dated 22nd April, 2016. In fact, miscellaneous application dated 25th October, 2016 to recall/reconsider the communication dated 18th October, 2018 was also rejected on 2nd November, 2016 without any hearing or taking into account the events subsequent to 22nd April, 2016, particularly, the letter dated 22nd June, 2018 of the Commission. Thus, there is undisputedly a flaw in the decision making process. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18th October, 2016 from the office of the Commission informed the Petitioner that in the absence of paying interest within the 30 days as provided in the order dated 22nd April, 2016 under Section 127C (5) of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act), the application for settlement stands rejected. The Communication dated 2nd November, 2016 from the office of the Commission informed the Petitioner that its application dated 25th October, 2016 for restoration of its application by recall of order dated 18th October, 2916 was rejected. 4. Briefly, the facts leading to this Petition, are as under: (a) In the year 2009, the Petitioner had imported vitrified tiles (said goods) from China. The said goods were liable to antidumping duty in India, unl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of the application for settlement. The Petitioner responded to the notice and was heard by the Commission on its stand that no further duty and/or interest is payable. (e) On 22nd April, 2016, the Commission passed an order, not accepting the contention of the Petitioner. Nevertheless, it gave an opportunity to the Petitioner to make good the deficiency of short payment of duty and interest within 30 days of its order. In fact, the order dated 22nd April, 2016, records as under: 6.6: However, the Bench, instead of rejecting the application filed by the applicant would like to give an opportunity to him, to make good the deficiency. Accordingly, it passes the following order: O R D E R If the applicant deposits ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot deprived of the above amount for any period. (i) However, the Superintendent in the office of the Commission did not accept the above contention of the Petitioner. In fact, by a letter dated 22nd June, 2016, the Superintendent in the office of the Commission, directed the Petitioners to deposit the amount of interest attributable in respect of the two bills of entry immediately. It further, directed the Petitioner to inform the Commission of the due payment of interest. (j) Consequent to the above, Petitioner on 8th July, 2016 addressed a letter to the Commission, pointing out that the interest as directed by letter dated 22nd June, 2016, is deposited. The above communication also enclosed challan, evidencing payment of interes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... requirements of the order dated 22nd April, 2016 of the Commission. 6 As against the above, Mr. Adik, learned Counsel for the Revenue states that the order dated 22nd April, 2016 is a self operating order. Therefore, once the Petitioner has not complied with the payment of interest within the time provided in order dated 22nd April, 2016, the application for settlement stand rejected. It is submitted that the communication dated 22nd June, 2018 from the office of the Commission cannot lead to modification of the order dated 22nd April, 2016 passed by the Commission. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the order dated 22nd April, 2016 gave the Petitioner an opportunity to make good the deficiency of not having pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directing them to deposit interest immediately. Petitioner, in compliance thereof paid the interest. These were issues which required the Commission to hear the Petitioner, before holding/ communicating that there is non-compliance with the order dated 22nd April, 2016. 9. In fact, miscellaneous application dated 25th October, 2016 to recall/reconsider the communication dated 18th October, 2018 was also rejected on 2nd November, 2016 without any hearing or taking into account the events subsequent to 22nd April, 2016, particularly, the letter dated 22nd June, 2018 of the Commission. Thus, there is undisputedly a flaw in the decision making process. The Commission is entitled to come to a view that the Petitioner has not complied with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
