TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ters (P) Ltd. Vs CC Bangalore (2006 (5) TMI 317 - CESTAT, BANGALORE) and the other decisions as referred in OIA have no relevance as these decisions are rendered prior to the Hon'ble High Court and Apex Court's order. By respectfully following the orders of Hon'ble High Court & Apex Court, the interest @ 15% demanded in the original adjudication order is restored and the impugned order to the extent of giving relief on interest is set aside. - Following decision of Pratibha Syntext Ltd. Vs UOI [2003 (7) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY] - Decided in favour of Revenue. - Appeal No. C/40582/2013 - Final Order No. 40373/2015 - Dated:- 10-4-2015 - Hon ble Shri R. Periasami,J. For the Appellant : Shri M. Rammohan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal and the findings of the adjudication. He submits that they have not fulfilled the conditions of the Notification No.204/92 and also they have not fulfilled the condition as per the bond executed before the licensing authority. Part G of Part-I of the Annexure to the notification clearly stipulated a situation where the conditions of the notification are not complied, duty and interest has to be paid. At column No.5 of Part G clearly shows an amount of duty and interest paid by the licence holder. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously held that there is no provision in the notification for demand of interest. He further submits that once they have executed the bond that they failed to fulfil the obligation, duty and int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by both sides. Revenue filed this appeal against impugned order wherein LAA set aside the interest demanded by the adjudicating authority. I find that the present appeal is second round of litigation. The respondent imported Polyurethane Spandex Yarn/Lykra under DEEC Advance Licences and cleared duty free under Customs Notification No.204/92-Cus. dt. 19.5.92. The DRI registered the case that the respondent failed to comply with the condition of the notification. Adjudicating authority in his de novo proceedings re-determined the quantity of imported goods not utilised and confirmed the customs duty and interest @ 15% and also imposed penalty. The respondents admitted duty liability and contested only the interest before LAA and he all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levant portions of Hon'ble High Court's order is reproduced as under :- 16mption Notification No. 204/92 issued under Section 25 of the Customs Act clearly provides that before clearance of the imported goods, the petitioners shall produce proof of having executed a bond or a legal undertaking before the concerned Licensing Authority, for complying with conditions of the said Notification. Therefore, the terms and conditions of bond and legal undertaking executed before the Licensing authorities agreeing to pay customs duty with interest in case of breach, became part and parcel of the conditions of the exemption notification issued under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since, there was breach of the terms of the Exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ility has been admitted by the petitioners. As a matter of fact, duty liability has been recovered from the petitioners. Petitioners have not challenged this part of the impugned order which directs recovery and adjustment of the duty liability from the petitioner. It was thus clear that the petitioners have committed breach of the exemption notification as well as the terms of the licences. In this view of the matter, no further opportunity was required to be given to the petitioners. The admission of the petitioners would bind them. Therefore, recovery of duty liability and adjustment thereof with interest was well within the jurisdiction of the Settlement Commission. Such order cannot be said to be in breach of principles of natural just ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 's order. The relevant portion of the Apex Court order is reproduced as under :- 16. The core question which, therefore, arises for consideration is as to whether the term interest used therein would include within its fold interest payable under the bond furnished by the appellant before the Director General of Foreign Trade. 17. The statutory scheme for the purpose of approaching the Settlement Commission and the mode and manner in which appropriate order is to be passed thereupon, are governed by Chapter XIVA of the Act. With a view to enable the Settlement Commission to pass an order, an applicant is required to make a full and true disclosure of his liability. As noticed hereinbefore, in the event his application is accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
