2007 (5) TMI 472 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of duty and penalty amounts.
2. Stay of operation of the impugned order.
3. Early disposal of the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The appellants sought waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of duty and penalty amounts imposed by the Commissioner under Rule 8 of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for the Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. The duty amount exceeded Rs. 1.9 crores, relating to parts and components of automatic teller machines classified under SH 84729030. The Commissioner denied the benefit of Customs Notification No. 21/2000 for 'ATMs' to the appellants, demanding duty and imposing penalties. The appellants argued for a prima facie case based on the Appellate Commissioner's order, HSN Notes, and a Board's Circular supporting their claim for 'Model P75'. However, for 'Model P77', the appellants were directed to pre-deposit the duty amount within four weeks.

2. The Deputy Commissioner withdrew Annexure-III, affecting the import of parts/components for 'ATMs of P75 Model'. The Tribunal found a strong prima facie case for the appellants regarding 'P75 Model' and stayed the operation of the impugned order for these goods. However, for 'P77 Model', the appellants were directed to pre-deposit the duty amount. The withdrawal of Annexure-III for 'P75 Model' had no legal effect during the appeal's pendency.

3. The Tribunal considered the application for out-of-turn disposal of the appeal due to the high stake involved. Both sides highlighted pending appeals by the assessee and the Revenue against the Appellate Commissioner's order. The Tribunal directed all related appeals to be heard and disposed of together for early resolution. The parties were notified accordingly for further proceedings.

This judgment addressed the appellants' requests for waiver, stay, and early disposal of the appeal, focusing on the classification of imported goods for 'ATMs' under specific Customs Notifications and relevant legal provisions. The Tribunal's decision balanced the prima facie case presented by the appellants for 'P75 Model' against the pre-deposit requirement for 'P77 Model', considering the withdrawal of Annexure-III and the pending appeals for comprehensive resolution.