TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Customs, Bangalore issued a notice dated 11-1-1999 asking the petitioner to show cause as to why customs duty amounting to Rs. 3,42,950.00 is not to be demanded from him as the goods imported are populated circuit boards classifiable under Chapter Heading 8473.30 of the Customs Tariff Act. Petitioner requested the Additional Commissioner to adjourn personal hearing from 23-10-2001 to the first week of November, 2001. However, the Additional Commissioner, ignoring the said communication, passed an order on 31-10-2001. Aggrieved by the order at Annexure-A passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Bangalore. He rejected the appeal in terms of Annexure-B dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es on a circular of 1990 in support of his submissions. 6.Per contra, Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Government, appearing for the respondent would say that subsequent to the 1990-Notification a fresh notification has been issued on 2-6-1998. He says that in terms of the said notification one month time is granted by the Department. 7.After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully perused the material on record. 8.Admitted facts reveal of an adverse order against the petitioner. Petitioner has a statutory remedy of second appeal before the Tribunal. He has time till 19-10-2003. In the meanwhile, on 18th August, 2003, an intimation has been sent to the petitioner stating therein t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms of the statute. If the argument of the petitioner is accepted, there is every chance of some mischief being played somewhere by unscrupulous elements. Large sums of monies are involved in excise cases. Parties may also delay the filing of appeals by not receiving copies in time and avoid notice of the order. Therefore, the argument of blanket stay even in the absence of no appeal and no stay, is not in the interest of justice. Therefore, this argument does not appeal to me. However, I must notice realities in these cases. Authorities are also not to be allowed to take coercive proceedings thereby virtually frustrating an appeal remedy in some cases. In these circumstances a balance has to be struck by this Court in the larger interest of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of refunds very often the department is being called upon to refund duty even when the stay applications preferred by the department are pending before the appellate authorities. The Board felt that the same analogy should apply to demands. It was felt that the correct legal3. position is that unless the assessee obtains a stay the department is within its rights to recover the duty confirmed in an order. However, as a practical step and for administrative convenience, a period of 3 months (one month for filing appeal and stay application and two more months for obtaining orders on the stay application) can be granted before taking coercive steps to recover the dues. If an assessee is genuinely interested, he need not take matter leisure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case would be decided on a case to case basis. In view of the facts stated above, the4. Board desires that you may dispose of stay application within a period of two months from the date of its receipt, in case for cogent reasons, you are not in a position to dispose of the main appeal within the same time frame." Thereafter the Board has issued a latest Circular dated 2-6-1998. The Board has stated as under : "According to these instructions, Central Excise Officers were to allow a period of three months from the date of decision for payment of dues adjudicated before resorting to coercive measures to recover such dues. However, if the stay application is rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) even before the lapse of time of thr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the view that it is fair and reasonable that no coercive steps are to be taken during the pendency of the stay application. This Court can take a judicial notice that - to file an appeal and the stay petition, it may take reasonable time. The Tribunal may also take some reasonable time to dispose of the stay application. In such circumstances, this court has to step in and clear the fog and pave way for an effective remedy to a litigant. 13.In the circumstances and taking realities into consideration, and taking note of beneficial circulars and the judgments referred to above, I deem it proper to hold and direct that - (1) the authorities are not to resort to any recovery proceedings for a period of one month from the date of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
