2004 (6) TMI 484 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Extension of time for making pre-deposit of duty.
2. Request for full waiver of pre-deposit.
3. Consideration of Apex Court's remand order.
4. Lack of stay order from High Court on recovery of customs duty.

Extension of Time for Making Pre-Deposit of Duty:
The appellants were initially directed to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 8.5 lakhs within a specified period, which was later extended upon their request. However, the appellants failed to comply with the extended deadline and instead sought a full waiver of the pre-deposit amount. Despite the lack of compliance, the Tribunal granted an additional extension for the pre-deposit, directing the appellants to fulfill the requirement within 15 days from the new order date.

Request for Full Waiver of Pre-Deposit:
The appellants argued that the denial of the benefit of a specific notification by the adjudicating authority was based on the cancellation of a license for medical equipment import by the DGHS. They highlighted their legal actions, including a Writ Petition in the High Court and an SLP in the Supreme Court, resulting in a remand order from the Apex Court to the High Court. The appellants contended that the remand order implied an ongoing stay on duty recovery, justifying a full waiver of the pre-deposit. However, the Tribunal found that no interim stay on duty recovery was granted by the Apex Court, and no such stay order was issued by the High Court, leading to the rejection of the full waiver request.

Consideration of Apex Court's Remand Order:
The Tribunal reviewed the Apex Court's remand order, which did not include an interim stay on duty recovery. Despite acknowledging the relevance of the proceedings before the High Court to the case at hand, the Tribunal emphasized the absence of a stay order from the High Court, indicating the appellants' failure to establish a genuine case for a full waiver of pre-deposit and duty recovery stay.

Lack of Stay Order from High Court on Recovery of Customs Duty:
While recognizing the potential impact of the High Court proceedings on the current case, the Tribunal noted the absence of any stay order on customs duty recovery from the High Court. This lack of a stay order, coupled with the appellants' failure to comply with the pre-deposit requirement, led the Tribunal to grant a further extension for the pre-deposit while emphasizing the importance of fulfilling the deposit within the specified timeframe.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai highlights the issues surrounding the extension of time for pre-deposit, the request for a full waiver of pre-deposit, the consideration of the Apex Court's remand order, and the absence of a stay order from the High Court on the recovery of customs duty.