Case Law Details
Ajay Sagar Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court didn’t invoked power to dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit as the case doesn’t fall in the category of rare and exceptional case. Further, it was found that petitioner was actively involved in evasion of duty and intent the parties to misdeclare imports.
Facts- The instant writ petition has been preferred seeking to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction conferred upon the Court by Article 226 of the Constitution and to frame directions for waiver of the pre-deposit requirement as placed in terms of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962.
The petitioner is constrained to approach this Court since Section 129E of the Act no longer incorporates a provision which may be invoked by either the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs and Central Excise or the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to waive the condition of pre-deposit in case of undue hardship. It becomes pertinent to note that Section 129E of the Act as it stood prior to its amendment by Finance Act (No .2) of 2014 had conferred a discretion on the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the CESTAT to dispense with the deposit liable to be made for the purposes of an assessee pursuing an appeal where it was found that the deposit of duty, interest or penalty levied would cause undue hardship.
Conclusion- The respondents had found that the petitioner was complicit and actively involved in the evasion of duty and the intent of these parties to mis-declare imports while acting in concert. Bearing in mind the material which has been relied upon and the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, we find ourselves unable to hold that his case would fall in the category of rare and exceptional cases. Prima facie, and solely to examine whether a waiver is merited, we have delved through the relevant record and find that the conclusions drawn by the respondents insofar as the petitioner is concerned can neither be said to be wholly perverse nor unsustainable. We thus find that the circumstances do not warrant the invocation of the extraordinary power conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
