Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1602 - AT - CustomsTime Limitation - Confiscation of imported goods as well as indigenous procured goods in year 2000 itself - goods confiscated lying in the bonded warehouse - depreciation as per the notifications 13/81-Customs as amended not granted by the adjudicating authority - renewal of license denied - HELD THAT:- The appellant in the case has approached the Tribunal as many as four time against the various orders passed by the adjudicating authority/appellant authority on the same sets of facts and circumstances. In spite of quashing the demand/order against appellant by the Commissioner (Appeal) and the Tribunal, the adjudicating authority has been issuing the show cause notices on one pretext or other contrary to the provision of Customs and Central Excise Act. Once the order passed by the Commissioner on the same issue which has been set aside by this Tribunals and also by the Commissioner (Appeal), the re-opening of the issue amounts to non compliance of the order of the Tribunal/Commissioner (Appeal). Once the department has issued the show cause notice before the expiry of LOP and that has been decided in appeal, by setting aside that, the same issue cannot be revived by another show cause notice even after the extension of LOP period. The department has not renewed the warehousing licence of the appellant after year 2000 and thereafter the demand was required to be made in terms of the notifications No.13/81 within prescribed time, which has not been done by the department. Therefore, the demand is also time bared. The entire goods, which has been procured indigenously or imported is still lying in the appellant’s warehouse. The appellant has requested for the disposal of confiscated goods under the provisions of Customs and Central Excise Act and recover the demand penalty against them. But the department has failed to do so - the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the law, on merits and also on the limitation and is not sustainable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|