Habasit Iakoka Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, in the matter of Habasit Iakoka Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, declined to adjudicate the appeal on merits. Instead, the Tribunal referred the case to the CESTAT President for the constitution of a Special Bench after it was revealed that appeals challenging the same Order-in-Original (OIO) had been filed before different CESTAT Benches. The Tribunal’s decision reinforced the principles of territorial jurisdiction and comity of courts in appellate proceedings.
Background of the Dispute
The appeal arose from an OIO dated February 18, 2013, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Surat – I, who was acting as the Common Adjudicating Authority. The underlying investigation, conducted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Surat, targeted various exporters, including M/s. Ayush Exports and M/s. Astha Exim, for allegedly over-valuing exports (dyed fabrics, metal bindings, ladies’ nightwear, etc.) to fraudulently avail excess benefits under the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) Scheme and other export incentives.
The Commissioner’s OIO confirmed the recovery of customs duty forgone on imported goods utilized against DEPB scrips and imposed penalties. Specifically, the appellant, M/s. Habasit Iakoka Pvt. Ltd., was held liable to pay customs duty amounting to Rs.9,33,451/− against one license, along with an equivalent penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962.
