Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : LSML Private Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
Appeal Number : Customs Miscellaneous Application No. 40122 Of 2021 & Customs Appeal No. 41022 Of 2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 15/02/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

LSML Private Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

Facts- M/s. LSML Private Ltd are manufacturers of wind turbines, imported 1262 pieces of Hot Rolled Painted Steel Plates weighing 5507.403 MT, through the Chennai Port, vide BE no. 4008987 dated 22.01.2016 and bonded the goods in public bonded warehouse; they made various clearances either for themselves or third parties such as Rajam Steels ad V.K. Industrial Corporation Ltd etc and were duly allowed to be cleared by the bond officer; in respect of 878.395 MT, vide BE No. 3056014 dated 31.08.2017, officers of SIIB stopped the clearance, after payment of the duties as per the assessment made through the EDI. The department found that the goods are liable for the payment of the anti-dumping duty. The department also imposed redemption fee on the appellants for the violation of the statute.

Conclusion- Held that section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, Antidumping Duty is to be construed as Customs duty and therefore in view of the amendment that was carried out in 2009 all the provisions of Customs Act and the Rules made thereunder are squarely applicable to Antidumping Duty and as such in case of warehoused goods duty applicable as on the date of clearance from warehouse is to be recovered in terms of Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, we find that Ld. Commissioner has correctly held that Antidumping Duty is payable by the appellants.

Further held that confiscation and imposition of redemption fine are not warranted as here was nothing that the appellant-importers have consciously suppressed or misrepresented. If ADD escaped assessment, the department is free to demand the same as per provisions of Customs Act, 1962. However, for the same reason, goods cannot be confiscated and penalty cannot be imposed. Therefore, we set aside the confiscation of the goods, imposition of redemption fine and various penalties.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031