9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (3) TMI 342X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the applicant during the aforesaid period and as detailed in column 6 of the application. The proceedings relating to the SCN in question are pending for adjudication before the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), New Delhi. The applicant accept the duty liability amounting to Rs. 62,74,646/- as against an amount of Rs. 75,61,758/- demanded in respect of the subject 16 Bills of Entry in the SCN. 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows : The officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as DRI), on receipt of information, carried out searches in number of premises on 23-5-1998 and seized various electronics goods of foreign origin totally valued at Rs. 2,90,30,170/-. Certain documents were also taken over. Investigations carried pursuant to these searches revealed that the applicant amongst certain other parties (who are not before this Commission) have imported various electronic goods by suppressing and under stating the correct value thereof that the original import invoices had been suppressed from the Customs authorities and further that the suppliers of the goods in some cases had declared different invoice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 for reason of misdeclaration and suppression of the value declared in the respective Bills of Entry and on their being not available for confiscation why appropriate redemption fine be not imposed under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) duties of Customs of Rs. 35.0 lakhs voluntarily deposited by the noticee M/s. Merrytone Overseas, Delhi during the course of investigation as referred to in Chart VI enclosed with this notice should not be appropriated and adjusted towards the total duties and penalties payable by the noticee under this notice. (iv) as to why penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 should not be imposed upon them for their various offences, omissions and commissions as aforesaid. (v) as to why penalty under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 should not be imposed upon them for their offences, omissions and commissions as aforesaid. Now, therefore, the said M/s. Merrytone Overseas, 63, Ravi Nagar, Delhi, Shri Jagmohan Singh, Proprietor and Shri Gurmeet Singh Sehgal are hereby required to show cause to the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have filed an amended application in respect of all Bills of Entry relating to them on 14-1-2002. The Revenue requested for time as no copy of the amended application had been supplied to them. The matter was, therefore, adjourned for hearing on 7th February, 2002. On 7-2-2002, the Advocate for the applicant requested the Bench that as they satisfied all the conditions of Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962, therefore, their case may be admitted. With regard to the objections of the Revenue regarding several other co-noticees who were not before the Commission, the Advocate stressed that the other co-noticees have been impleaded on various other grounds and their not being before the Commission should not disqualify the applicant's case. 5. The Advocate for the Revenue stated that he had just been given the written submissions to the Department and requested that he may be granted two weeks time to file his objections to the admission and agreed that after his written submissions have been filed and a copy given to the applicant, no further hearing is requested and the Commission would be free to pass necessary orders on the admissibility of the case. 6. The Bench inf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... correctly in the relevant Bills of Entry. Copies of Bills of Entry in respect of which the duty liability has been accepted are annexed as Annexure-I and Annexure-II to the application. Copies of Bills of Entry where duty liability has been disputed are annexed as Annexures-III, IV and V. The duty calculation chart of the admitted duty liability is annexed at Annexure-X-A and the duty calculation chart of disputed liability is annexed as Annexure-X-B. 9. The Revenue filed their written submissions with regard to the amended application on 11-3-2002. The Revenue have objected to the admission of the applications, inter alia, on the ground that :- (i) applications are not maintainable either in law or on facts. (ii) The applications are mala fide and is an abuse of the process of the Commission. (iii) The adjudication proceedings are ripe for disposal and covers 12 noticees including the applicant. Filing of the present petition at this stage will hamper the adjudication process of the applicant as well as other noticees. (iv) The petitioner has not made a full and true disclosure of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be made for the interpretation of the classification of the goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) [emphasis provided] SECTION 127A. Definitions. - In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, - (b) "Case" means any proceeding under this Act or any other Act for the levy, assessment and collection of customs duty, or any proceeding by way of appeal or revision in connection with such levy, assessment or collection, which may be pending before a proper officer or the Central Government on the date on which an application under sub-section (1) of Section 127B is made : Provided that where any appeal or application for revision has been preferred after the expiry of the period specified for the filing of such appeal or application for revision under this Act and which has not been admitted, such appeal or revision shall not be deemed to be a proceeding pending within the meaning of this clause; [emphasis provided] SECTION 127C. Procedure on receipt of application under Section 127B. - (1) On receipt of an application under Section 127B, the Settlement Commission shall call for a report from the Commissioner of Customs having jurisdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for a report from the Jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs and on the basis of the material contained in such report and having regard to the nature and circumstances of the case or the complexity of the investigation involved therein, the Commission may allow the application to be proceeded with or reject it. The application shall not be rejected unless the applicant has been heard by the Commission. Similarly, if the Jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs does not furnish the required report within the stipulated period, it shall be presumed that the Commissioner of Customs has no objection to such application. The Commissioner, however, has the right to raise objection, if any, at the time of hearing fixed by the Commission for Admission of the application. The law also requires that the Commission shall inform the date of such hearing to the applicant and the Jurisdictional Commissioner within a period of not exceeding 2 months from the date of receipt of such application. It is clear from these provisions that the applicant is entitled under the law to approach the Commission at any stage of the pending proceedings relating to levy, assessment and collection of Customs duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... requires that the goods may be examined and tested and thereafter the duty leviable on such goods shall be assessed. The goods are allowed clearance under Section 47 after the importer has paid the import duty assessed thereon. In view of this position in law, it is clear that the 'duty liability which has not been disclosed before the proper officer', referred to in Section 127B(1) can refer to only the duty liability which has not been disclosed in a Bill of Entry at the stage of assessment. It is for this reason that the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 127B requires that application for settlement could be made only if the applicant has filed a Bill of Entry. The disclosure required to be made by the applicant in his application is, therefore, to be measured in terms of the liability discharged by him at the time of assessment by filing a Bill of Entry. Under the law, the applicant is free to disclose in his application any amount of duty liability which is in excess of the liability discharged by him by filing a Bill of Entry and assessment thereon provided such amount, in terms of the first proviso of sub-section (1) ibid exceeds Rs. 2 lakhs. The applicant, of cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
