Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2019 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 899 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURTExemption from payment of cost recovery charges - Whether the appellant can be held responsible for non-payment of cost recovery charges when no calculation was made by the Revenue? - HELD THAT:- The appellant started working as CFS with effect from 1-3-2008 and as per instruction dated 14-12-1995 read with Circular No. 52/97-Cus., dated 17-10-1997, a CFS is required to deposit in advance the cost recovery charges. It is fact on record that cost recovery charges are to be calculated by the Revenue, the appellant cannot pay cost recovery charges without calculation of demand of cost recovery charges payable by the appellant. Therefore, in the absence of any calculation of the demand made by the Revenue, the appellant cannot be responsible for non-payment of cost recovery charges. As per C.B.E. & C. circular dated 12-9-2005, if CFS achieved bench mark performance during the previous years, it is entitled for waiver of charges. Admittedly, in this case the appellant has achieved the bench mark performance within the initial two years. As the appellant has achieved the bench mark performance, in that circumstance, the Revenue is duty bound to examine the issue and disposed of the claim of waiver failing which the Revenue cannot continue to demand of cost recovery charges from the appellant. On perusal of the said provision, the CFS is required to pay the cost recovery charges at rate and manner specified by the Ministry. As, no manner or rate has been prescribed under the regulation or any other way subsequent to the regulation, in that circumstance, we are of the view that cost recovery charges cannot be demanded from the appellant. Respondent during 2008-2010 achieved benchmark performance and instructions of 2005 as well 2009 nowhere require filing of application by CFS seeking waiver of cost recovery charges. As per instructions no dues should be pending on 31.8.2005 and it is not case of Appellant that anything was pending against Respondent on 31.8.2005. Even otherwise, the Respondent cleared dues of 2008-10 prior to notice dated 04.06.2012(Annexure A-1) issued by Appellant. Prior to 2009 only instructions were holding the field and Respondent-CFS cannot be asked to pay cost recovery charges when it had already achieved benchmark performance which is the paramount requirement. The Respondent has not claimed exemption for the period 2008-2010, thus there seems no reason to charge cost of officers when benchmark performance stood achieved. There are substance in the findings recorded by Tribunal that no demand of cost of officers can be made in the absence of specified rates and manner. Appeal dismissed - decided in favor of appellant.
|