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

2015 (12) TMI 537 - DELHI HIGH COURT

2015 (12) TMI 537 - DELHI HIGH COURT - 2015 (326) E.L.T. 639 (Del.) - Power of Settlement Commission to entertain the matter pertaining to Gold - Seizure of goods - Illicit import of goods - Imposition of interest and penalty - Held that:- Respondent sought to place reliance on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Customs v. Ashok Kumar Jain: [2013 (8) TMI 317 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. But, the decision in Ashok Kumar Jain (supra) was distinguished inasmuch as the issue of Section 123 had no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

even accepted the penalty and fine which were imposed by the Settlement Commission. It was also contended that the petitioner had gone to the extent of issuing a release letter dated 08.06.2015 subsequent to the order of the Settlement Commission. But, we cannot agree with this submission of the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 inasmuch as there cannot be any estoppel against the statute. Once the statute is clear that where the subject matter is ‘gold’, the Settlement Commission would no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 8354/2015 & CM 17712/2015 1. This petition is directed against the final order No.F-2348/CUS/ 2015-SC (PB) dated 17.04.2015 passed by the Custom and Central Excise Settlement Commission, whereby the respondent No.1 s settlement application was finally decided under Section 127C (5) of the Customs Act, 1962 in the following manner:- 9. In the instant case, the goods seized within a Customs area and, therefore, there is no doubt regarding the fact that 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

ble Delhi High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 9A. The Bench has carefully considered the material available on record and submissions made by the applicant at the time of hearing. The Bench observes that the applicant has cooperated in the settlement proceeding and made full and true disclosure of their duty liability. The applicant has admitted and deposited ₹ 4,86,305/- as Customs duty. In view of the above and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bench fina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/- already paid by the applicant is ordered to be appropriated against the settled amount of interest. Nothing further remains to be paid on this count. Penalty: In the facts and circumstances of the case, Bench imposes a penalty of ₹ 75,000/-( Rupees seventy five thousand only) on the applicant under the provisions invoked in the SCN and grants him immunity from penalty in excess of the said amount. Fine: The Bench orders a sum of ₹ 75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand only) 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

tion (2) & (3) of the Section 127H of the Act. This order shall be void and immunities withdrawn if the Commission finds, at any time, that the applicant has concealed any particular material to the settlement or has given false evidence or had indulged in fraud and mis-representation of facts for obtaining the settlement order. 12. A copy of this order is given to the applicant herein and to the jurisdictional Commissioner for their use in the implementation of this Order. No one should use .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

v. Shri Ram Niwas Verma:2015 (323) E.L.T. 424 decided by this Bench on 25.08.2015. In that case also, an issue arose as to whether a settlement could have been arrived at by the Settlement Commission, where the subject matter was gold . Section 127 B and Section 123 of the Customs Act were examined. The said provisions read as under:- 127B. Application for settlement of cases. - (1) Any importer, exporter or any other person (hereinafter referred to as the applicant in this Chapter) may, in resp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

particulars of such dutiable goods in respect of which he admits short levy on account of misclassification, under-valuation or inapplicability of exemption notification or otherwise and such application shall be disposed of in the manner hereinafter provided : Provided that no such application shall be made unless,- (a) the applicant has filed a bill of entry, or a shipping bill, or a bill of export, or made a baggage declaration, or a label or declaration accompanying the goods imported or ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

b-Section in cases which are pending in the Appellate Tribunal or any court: Provided also that no application under this sub-section shall be made in relation to goods to which Section 123 applies or to goods in relation to which any offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) has been committed: Provided also that no application under this sub-Section shall be made for the interpretation of the classification of the goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 19 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

seized; and (ii) if any person, other than the person from whose possession the goods were seized, claims to be the owner thereof, also on such other person; (b) in any other case, on the person, if any, who claims to be the owner of the goods so seized. (2) This section shall apply to gold and manufactures thereof, watches, and any other class of goods which the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, specify. (underlining added) 3. After examining the said provisions, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ld. The respondent made an application, nevertheless, to the Settlement Commission which has entertained the same and has also rejected the plea raised by the Revenue that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain such an application. We agree with the submission made by the learned counsel for the Revenue that the Settlement Commission did not have the jurisdiction to entertain such an application as there was a complete bar provided in the third proviso to Section 127B(1) read with Section 123 .....

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