News Update

India to wait for Canadian Police inputs on arrest of men accused of killing Sikh separatist: JaishankarLabour Party candidate Sadiq Khan wins record third term as London MayorArmy convoy ambushed in Poonch sectorDeadly floods evict 70K Brazilians out of homes; 57 killed so farGovt scraps ban on export of onionFormer Delhi Congress chief Arvinder Singh Lovely joins BJP with three moreUS Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha Elections7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implication
 
Commissioner (Appeals) allowed appeal for earlier period - Ordering pre-deposit of full duty in another appeal of identical issue is not correct - Petitioner is entitled for full waiver: HC

By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, DEC 21, 2016: THE petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs [Appeals] in the stay petitions filed by the petitioner in the appeals preferred against the order-in-original with regard to the classification of the goods which are imported by the petitioner. In the Bill of Entry No.639031 dated 05.01.2008, the petitioner declared the goods as "Low Noise Block Down Converter" and classified the same under CTH 85437099. However, the Adjudicating Authority, by order dated 06.11.2013, classified the product as "Universal Single KU Low Noise Booster" under CTH 85299090 and demanded differential duty of Rs.1,58,548/-. When the petitioner sought for stay of this order, the Commissioner [Appeals] has directed that the entire amount to be pre-deposited for being entitled to an order of stay.

The Petitioner submitted that they have made out a prima facie case before the Commissioner [Appeals] inasmuch as in respect of an identical import, the Commissioner [Appeals] has passed an order in favour of the petitioner in Order-in-Appeal No.580/2013 dated 04.04.2013. Apart from that, the petitioner relied upon a Circular No.13/2013 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs dated 05.04.2013. Therefore, the Commissioner [Appeals] ought to have granted stay of demand of the differential duty and heard the appeals on merits.

After hearing both sides, the High Court held:

+ Insofar as the aspect relating to prima facie case is concerned, this Court is of the view that in respect of the identical import, the Commissioner [Appeals], in the Order-in-Appeal No.580/2013 dated 04.04.2013, has accepted the petitioner's classification of the goods as "CTH 85437099". That apart, Circular No.13/2013 dated 05.04.2013, also prima facie appears to be fully in favour of the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner has been able to establish a prima facie case, which also would lien in favour of the petitioner while considering the aspect of balance of convenience.

+ With regard to irreparable hardship is concerned, though the petitioner has not pleaded any financial difficulty, since the issue is covered by Circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs and the order passed by the Commissioner [Appeals] in assessee's own case in Order-in-Appeal No.580/2013 dated 04.04.2013. This Court is convinced that the petitioner is entitled to an order of stay without any condition for being able to contest the appeal before the Commissioner [Appeals].

+ Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders in F.No.C3/1226 & 1228/D/2013-SEA dated 23.01.2014 are set aside and there will be an order of stay of the order-in-original dated 05.11.2013, till the appeals are heard and disposed of by the Commissioner (Appeals).

(See 2016-TIOL-3064-HC-MAD-CUS)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.