Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2023 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 842 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTViolation of principles of natural justice - non-consideration of documents and statements - EPCG scheme - contention of the Appellant that the demand of interest should be limited to the amounts debited in cash and not in respect of the amounts to be debited from EPCG licences - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal has not examined various facts of the Appellant. The Tribunal was required to examine the facts and documents so as to form an opinion as to whether in the facts of the Appellant’s case, the decision of Valecha Engineering Ltd. [2009 (8) TMI 451 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] was at all attracted. The Tribunal in passing the impugned order has merely reproduced the Order-in- Original and various paragraphs of Valecha Engineering, without examining its applicability to the facts of the Appellant and assigning any reasons thereof. The Tribunal has reproduced the submissions of the Appellant with respect to levy of interest to the effect that the Appellant had contended that levy of interest is against the doctrine of promissory estoppel and further that the interest in alternative can be only in respect of the duty required to be paid by them in cash and not on the component of duty allowed to be debited by them from the EPCG licences. The Tribunal ought to have examined the effect of the communication received from DGFT dated 27th October 2014, on the issue of imposing interest. The Tribunal has also not recorded any finding on the submissions made by the Appellant that interest if at all ought to have been levied only on cash demand confirmed amounting to Rs.10.94 crores and not on the duty paid under EPCG licences - the Tribunal ought to have accorded reasons after examining the facts of the Appellant before deciding the issue of interest. On the issue of interest under Sections 28AA and 28AB of the Customs Act, the appeal is allowed - Tribunal directed to pass a speaking order after examining the facts of the Appellant and after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties and by speaking order.
|