Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2013 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 510 - AT - CustomsExemption from duty liability Actual user condition - import of cone type stone crusher - use in construction of roads - Held that:- Exemption notification should be strictly construed since it is an exception relied upon Gammon India Ltd., Vs. CC, Mumbai (2011 (7) TMI 17 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) and Novopan India Ltd., Vs. CCE, Hyderabad (1994 (9) TMI 67 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) - This was so held in the context of the principle that in a taxing statute, there is no room for any intendment, that regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words and that the matter should be governed wholly by the language of the notification, i.e., by the plain terms of the exemption - assessee had violated the terms and conditions of the notification - he was not eligible for the benefit of duty exemption under the notification. Eligibility for benefit - both the conditions with respect to the user as well as use had to be satisfied which had not been done in the case - When the notification stipulates two conditions, one with respect to the use and the other with respect to the user, both these conditions needs to be satisfied simultaneously and it cannot be said that the condition relating to the user can be ignored - If that was done it would make the condition relating to the user redundant - It was a well settled principle of law that the statute has to be interpreted in a harmonious manner so as to give effect to each and every word/expression used therein. Interpretation of provisions - Held that:- the importer assessee had violated the conditions of exemption and he was not eligible for the benefit of exemption - the confirmation of duty demand along with interest thereon made in the order were upheld - Court should not give such an interpretation to provisions which would render the provision ineffective or odious following the judgement of Balwant Singh vs. Jagdish Singh (2010 (7) TMI 556 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA). Confiscation of goods - the end-use condition relating to the goods stands clearly violated -they were rightly liable to confiscation under the provisions of section 111(o). Redemption Fine - Held that:- The fine imposed ought to be reduced substantially - the goods were diverted, they were used for the construction of roads though by a different user which could be considered as a mitigating factor in the case. Penalty u/s 112(a) - penalties imposed on the appellant firm under section 112 (a) Held that:- penalty was liable to imposed for contravention of the provisions of the law and there was no mens rea required to be established - mens rea was also evident from the conduct of the assesse - Considering the amount of duty sought to be evaded the penalty imposed cannot be said to harsh or unreasonable demand of duty along with interest was upheld decided against assessee.
|