BHANDARI GLASS COMPANY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX
LAWS(CE)-2015-1-2
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on January 01,2015

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

B.S.V.Murthy, Member (T) - (1.)THE issue involved is undervaluation of glass sheets imported by the two appellants namely Bhandari Glass Company and Rajasthan Glass House. There is a penalty on the proprietor and the Karta of the two appellants respectively.
(2.)THE learned counsel submits that the documents based on which the department came to the conclusion that appellant had undervalued the glass sheets imported by them were not provided and therefore they could not defend the case properly before the original authority. As regards the impugned order he submits that appellant was asked to deposit the entire amount of duty which could not be deposited and therefore the appeals have been rejected on the ground that appellant has not fulfilled the directions in the stay petition.
After hearing both the sides, we find that in respect of Rajasthan Glass House, the differential duty of Rs. 8,00,000/ - (Rupees Eight lakhs only) arose because of declaration of lower amount of freight than what was actually paid. The amount of Rs. 8,00,000/ - (Rupees Eight lakhs only) arising as a result of such declaration has been paid. As regards the balance amount of Rs. 30,00,000/ - (Rupees Thirty lakhs only), the learned counsel submits that there are contentious claims about the demand itself and appellant has not been provided opportunity, the matter may be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide on merits without any requirement of pre -deposit. As regards Bhandari Glass Company also, he submits that the total differential duty demanded is Rs. 3,00,000/ - (Rupees Three lakhs only) and the circumstances are similar in that case also. We find that the only claim made by the appellants before the original authority was that the quality imported by them is inferior contrary to the findings of the original authority. Prima facie we find that appellants may not have a very strong prima facie case in their favour and therefore they should be required to put to some terms. However it may not be to the extent of what Commissioner (Appeals) has required them to do. In view of the above observations, if the appellant Bhandari Glass Company deposits an amount Rs. 75,000 (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) and Rajasthan Glass House deposits an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/ - (Rupees Five lakhs only) within 8 weeks and report compliance to Commissioner, appeals may be decided by the learned Commissioner on merits after giving reasonable opportunity to the appellants to present their case after ascertaining compliance with requirement of deposits. Appeals and stay petitions get disposed of in above terms.

(Order pronounced and dictated in open court)

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.