2025-VIL-1205-DEL-CU

CUSTOMS High Court Cases

Customs - Duty evasion, CESTAT appeal, Pre-deposit requirement - Petitioners were alleged to be involved in the evasion of customs duty by undervaluing the imports of sanitary and bathroom fittings through their companies. Pursuant to the show cause notice, the OIO was passed imposing various penalties on the petitioners. The petitioners filed appeals before the CESTAT, but the same were dismissed for non-compliance of the pre-deposit requirement - Whether the amounts already deposited by the petitioners, including the amounts paid under protest during the investigation, can be considered for the purpose of pre-deposit under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 – HELD - The amounts deposited by the petitioners, including the amounts paid under protest during the investigation, cannot be completely ignored and a fresh deposit cannot be called for, only to deprive the petitioners of their legal appellate remedy. The amounts paid under protest should be taken into consideration for the purpose of pre-deposit, in the absence of any statutory language to the contrary. The provisions of a taxing statute must be construed strictly and literally, and there is no room for intendment. Since Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 does not expressly exclude the amounts deposited prior to the assessment, the same should be considered for the purpose of pre-deposit - the impugned order of the CESTAT is set aside and the Tribunal is directed that the petitioners' appeals be heard on merits, considering the substantial amounts already deposited with the Department – The petition is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page