The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the Customs duty demand on the seizure of gold under section 28 of the Customs Act,1962 on the ground of improper issuance of show cause notice.
Narayan Sharma, the appellant assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for confirming the absolute confiscation of goldunder sections 111(d), 111(1), and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and imposition of penalty and for the Customs Duty demand under section 28AA of the Customs Act on the assessee.
Naveen Bindal and Dilpreet Singh Gandhi, the counsels for the assessee contended that as per Section 17 of the Customs Act the importer shall assess the duty liability at the time of import and the proper officer shall verify the assessment or may re-assess the goods.
Also submitted that the assessee Narayan Sharma was not the importer and therefore, the duty under Section 28 cannot be confirmed and recovered from him who was only a carrier and not the importer of the alleged goods.
Swathi Chopra, the counsel for the department contended that the revenue rightly confiscated the smuggling of gold bars and the demand imposed to the assessee was as per the law and liable to be sustained.
The Bench observed that the demand of customs duty has been wrongly confirmed under Section 28 of the Customs Act along with interest under Section 28AA because no show cause notice which was required to be served upon the person chargeable with duty was issued to Narayan Sharma. Therefore the demand for duty of Rs. 11,80,872/- along with interest under Section 28AA of the Customs Act was not sustainable in law.
A single-member bench comprising S.S Garg (Judicial) quashed the Customs duty demand raised by the department on the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
