Loading...

2019-VIL-93-CESTAT-DEL-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2019-VIL-93-CESTAT-DEL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Case

Customs – appeal against confirmation of cost recovery charge - The Adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand under the provision of Regulation 5(2) and 6(1)(o) of Handling of Cargo in Custom Area Regulation, 2009. However, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand without invoking any of those regulation – HELD - Regulation 6(1)(o) of the Regulation (6) is not meant for recovery of default payment - the ld. Adjudicating authority has not appreciated the legal provision as contained in HCR, which do not indicate the machinery for realisation of cost recovery charge on account of being defaulted - the order passed by the ld. Adjudicating authority is beyond the scope of the provisions of HCCAR, 2009 more so when he has decided not to cancel the licence of the appellant and only imposed penalty - the provisions of Regulation 5(2) of HCCAR is clear and unambiguous that the cost recovery charge is not required to be paid when the same is specifically exempted by the order of Government of India and Ministry of Finance. It is on record that in the case of appellant Ministry has exempted cost recovery charge – thus, the appellant is duly entitled for the benefit of cost recovery charge for the subsequent years in terms of the new regulation also under provisions of the HCCAR, 2009 - the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed
Download File
show more Judgements  

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page