News Update

CBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silverFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerCentre receives Rs 18.5 lakh crore tax revenue upto Feb monthUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayExpert Committee on developing GIFT IFSC as 'Global Finance and Accounting Hub' submits report to IFSCAIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEADefence Production issues notification for re-organisation of DGQAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of Lokpal
 
CX - Findings that disclosures are honest and yet there is suppression and mis-declaration of facts cannot be reconciled - Remark made by Settlement Commission in final order deleted: High Court

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, SEPT 30, 2016: THE assessee was not amortizing the value of dies/fixtures supplied by M/s. Tata Motors Limited in the value of goods/sub-assemblies being manufactured and cleared on payment of duty.

But naturally, a SCN came to be issued demanding duty on the alleged under valuation.

The petitioner approached the Settlement Commission for settlement of his case and the Commission admitted the application and passed an order of Settlement.

The petitioner is aggrieved with this remark made in paragraph 7.4 of the order and which reads -

"7.4 … It is a clear case of suppression and misdeclaration of facts with intent to evade duty. …"

Before the High Court, the petitioner submits that having paid the Central Excise Duty, the interest component as well as the penalty, then, bearing in mind the bonafide conduct of the petitioner, this remark should be deleted.

The Counsel for the Revenue submitted that the remark was justified. Inasmuch as the petitioner was found to have not disclosed the value of dies/fixtures in the declared value of parts/components and which resulted in short payment of the Central Excise Duty;that it is in these circumstances the remark was inserted and it does not cause any prejudice and, therefore, it should not be deleted.

The High Court inter alia observed –

+ We do not think that in the given facts and circumstances, there was any need to record a finding that there is a suppression and mis-declaration of facts with intent to evade duty.

+ The Settlement Commission, in this case, took the application for settlement on record and adjudicated it in accordance with law. The very purpose was to provide an opportunity to parties like the petitioner to come clean by readily accepting the calculations and computation.

+ Precisely, that has been done and there is no challenge to the order of the Settlement Commission on merits. The findings that the disclosures are honest and yet there is suppression and mis-declaration of facts cannot be reconciled. We, therefore, delete that part of the order.

The writ petition was allowed to that extent.

Nonetheless, the High Court also made it clear that – "By virtue of this order, the petitioner will not derive any benefit in the form of refund of duty, interest and penalty already paid under the order of the Settlement Commission."

In passing : Rule 9 of CCR, 2004 refers. See - 2011-TIOL-1289-CESTAT-MUM & 2014-TIOL-1096-CESTAT-MUM.

(See 2016-TIOL-2313-HC-MUM-CX)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023