Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 420 - HC - CustomsNon-fulfillment of export obligation - Diversion of imported polyester staple fibres under DEEC scheme - Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal is justified in setting aside the demand of duty on the goods on the ground that though they were seized after customs clearance and absolutely confiscated under Section 111 [m] and 111 [o] of the Customs Act? Held that: - The liability to pay duty has nothing to do with confiscation of the goods under Section 111 and/or under Section 125 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the learned Tribunal has materially erred in setting aside the demand for duty on the goods solely on the ground that they were seized after the customs clearance and absolutely confiscated under Section 111 [m] of the Customs Act. Identical question came to be considered by the Apex Court in the case of Security & Finance [P] Limited [1975 (10) TMI 30 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where it was held and observed that the levy of duty and the order of confiscation both operate in a different field. It is further observed that the import duty has to be paid inevitably by the importer. Confiscation or fine in lieu thereof is an infliction on the offender or circle of offenders. It is also observed that sometimes, the burden in both the cases, falls on the same person and at the other times, they may fall on different person. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of Appellant-Revenue.
|