GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (5) TMI 284 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (5) TMI 284 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - 2015 (322) E.L.T. 876 (Mad.) - Waiver of pre deposit - Evasion of custom duty - question on quantum of deposit amount ordered by the tribunal - Suppression of value of goods - Held that:- It is seen from the orders of the Adjudicating Authority as well as the order of the Tribunal, that on demand, the appellant has paid a sum of ₹ 73,34,856/- towards Anti-Dumping Duty and a sum of ₹ 35,31,843/- was appropriated towards customs duty. It is to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the deposit made towards anti-dumping duty at ₹ 73,34,856/- in excess of the final notification dated 26.12.2006 at ₹ 60.00 lakhs, we are inclined to accept the plea of the appellant. However, taking note of the demand of customs duty, at this point of time, the amount shall not be refunded. - Partial stay granted. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.755 of 2015 and M.P. No. 1 of 2015 - Dated:- 28-4-2015 - R.Sudhakar And K.B.K.Vasuki JJ. For the Appellant : Mr.Raghavan Ramabadran For the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the ground that it is a trade remedy measure even when the ADD stands fully paid already? ii) Whether the 2nd Respondent has erred in directing the Petitioner/appellant to deposit ₹ 60 lakhs towards total demand of ADD of ₹ 60 lakhs, when ₹ 73 lakhs already stands adjusted towards the said demand of ADD? 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: In the course of search conducted in the premises of the relative of the appellant, the officers of the Directorate of Revenue I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cs. Alleging that the appellant suppressed the actual transaction value with an intent to evade customs duty and to over-value the said imports in order to evade provisional Anti-Dumping Duty imposed on such imports, show cause notice was issued demanding customs duty of ₹ 1,88,90,986/- and provisional anti-dumping duty of ₹ 2,75,39,026/- vide provisional notification No.52/2006-cus. dated 31.5.2006 along with imposition of penalty. 3. Subsequent to the above said show-cause notice, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said order of the Adjudicating Authority, the appellant has filed an appeal before the Tribunal along with an application for waiver of pre-deposit. 6. The Tribunal after hearing the submissions, ordered pre-deposit holding as follows: "1. Ld. counsel explains that provisional anti-dumping duty was imposed on the imported goods by Notification No.52/2006-Cus. dt.31.5.2006. The duty so imposed was reduced by final Notification No.121/2006-Cus. dt. 26.12.2006. As a result of which, the provis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the adjudication. 3. Keeping in view that levy of anti-dumping duty is a trade remedy measure, there shall be no compromise at this stage for which appellant is directed to deposit ₹ 60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty lakhs only) by 25.3.2015. Subject to such deposit, there shall be waiver of predeposit of balance demand and stay of recovery thereof till disposal of appeal. Compliance to be made on 6.4.2015." 7. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the present appeal has been filed by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

He further submitted that the Tribunal has overlooked the fact that the appellant had deposited the entire anti-dumping duty. 9. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned standing counsel appearing for the Department and perused the materials placed before this Court. 10. It is seen from the orders of the Adjudicating Authority as well as the order of the Tribunal, that on demand, the appellant has paid a sum of ₹ 73,34,856/- towards Anti-Dumping Duty and a sum of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or producer from any country or territory (hereinafter in this section referred to as the exporting country or territory) to India at less than its normal value, then, upon the importation of such article into India, the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, impose an anti-dumping duty not exceeding the margin of dumping in relation to such article Explanation ....... (a).... (b)... (c)... (2) The Central Government may, pending the determination in accordance with the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d shall be made of so much of the anti-dumping duty which has been collected as is in excess of the anti-dumping duty as so reduced." 12. From a reading of the above-said provision makes it clear that if anti-dumping duty is reduced and the amount so paid is in excess of the demand, the said amount shall be refunded. 13. It is the case of the appellant that the Tribunal, without taking note of the excess payment made, had ordered pre-deposit of ₹ 60.00 lakhs, which is not in consonanc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version