Narrondass Manordass Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs ACC (Import) (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that recovery of duty under section 28(1) of the Customs Act for violation of condition of license not sustained as no allegation of violation raised by DGFT who issued the import license. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal allowed.
Facts- This appeal seeks to assail the order dated 19.02.2025 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs ACC (Import), New Customs House, New Delhi that confirms the customs duty on M/s. Narrondass Manordass in respect of goods imported with interest under section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962 and penalty u/s. 112(a)(i) of the Customs Act.
The issue that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is justified in availing exemption of customs duty under Notification No. 96/2008-Cus dated 13.08.2008 on import of gold dore bars from Tanzania in terms of the Import License dated 13.06.2022 issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade permitting imports subject to Notification No. 12/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012.
Conclusion- Held that it is only if the Import License issued by the DGFT was cancelled by the DGFT that the customs could have decided to recover the duty under section 28(1) of the Customs Act. In this view of the matter, the demand of customs duty from the appellant cannot be sustained nor can the imposition of penalty under section 112(a)(i) of the Customs Act be maintained. The impugned order is, accordingly, set aside and the appeal is allowed.
