CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

NEW DELHI

PRINCIPAL BENCH

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 60 OF 2010

(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 23/Commr/HKT/09 dated 20.11.2009 passed

by the Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi-110037)

Bharat Hotels

…Appellant

VERSUS

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)

…Respondent

New Delhi

WITH

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 61 OF 2010

(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 23/Commr/HKT/09 dated 20.11.2009 passed

by the Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi-110037)

Ms. Jyotsna Suri

…Appellant

VERSUS

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)

…Respondent

New Delhi

AND

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2010

(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 23/Commr/HKT/09 dated 20.11.2009 passed

by the Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi-110037)

Mr. Madhav Sikka

…Appellant

VERSUS

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)

…Respondent

New Delhi

APPEARANCE

Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, advocate, Shri Rachit Jain, Advocate Ms. Jyoti Pal

and Shri Ashwani Bhatia, Advocate for the appellant.

Shri P.V.R. Ramanan, Special Counsel and Shri Rakesh Kumar, Authorized

Representative for the Department

CORAM:

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT

HON’BLE SHRI P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

2

C/60, 61, 62/2021

Date of Hearing: 17.11.2022

Date of Decision: 19.01.2023

FINAL ORDER NO. _50046-50048_/2023

JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA:

Customs Appeal No. 60 of 2010 has been filed by Bharat

Hotels Pvt. Ltd.¹ to assail the order dated 20.11.2009 passed by the

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)², by which the aircraft

imported by the appellant against the Bill of Entry dated 16.05.2007

on the basis of a non-scheduled operator permit (charter) issued by

the Directorate General of Civil Aviation³ has been confiscated under

section 111(0) of the Customs Act 1962⁴ with an option to redeem

the same. The order also seeks to confirm the customs duty in terms

of the undertaking given by the appellant at the time of importation

and also imposes penalty under section 112 of the Customs Act.

2.

Customs Appeal No. 61 of 2010 has been filed by the

Jyotsna Suri, Chairman and Managing Director of the appellant to

assail the penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs imposed upon her under section

112 of the Customs Act.

3.

Customs Appeal No. 62 of 2010 has been filed by the

Madhav Sikka, Senior Vice President of the appellant to assail the

imposition of penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed upon him under section

112 of the Customs Act.

1.

the appellant

2.

the Commissioner

3.

DGCA

4.

the Customs Act

3

C/60, 61, 62/2021

4.

The appellant had imported the aircraft claiming customs duty

exemption under Notification No. 61 of 2017 dated 03.05.2007⁵ that

amended the earlier Exemption Notification No. 21 of 2002 dated

01.03.2002. Prior to importing the aircraft, the appellant had

obtained the no objection certificate from DGCA on 08.02.2007 to

operate the aircraft for non scheduled air transport (charter) services.

It needs to be noted that the appellant had earlier also imported an

aircraft after obtaining a permit on 06.02.2004 from the DGCA to

operate non scheduled air transport (charter) services. After

importing the second aircraft through the Bill of Entry dated

16.05.2007, the appellant requested the DGCA for inclusion of the

newly imported aircraft in the earlier permit dated 06.02.2004 and on

being satisfied that the appellant fulfilled the requirements, the

DGCA, by a letter dated 04.10.2007, endorsed the newly imported

aircraft in the earlier permit.

5.

The appellant claims that during the intermittent period from

May 2007 to October 2007 it could not use the newly imported

aircraft for charter services since the endorsement had not been

made by the DGCA in the permit and so the aircraft was used by the

Chairperson and Managing Director of the appellant and other

employees of the appellant for business purposes only. In other

words, the aircraft was used for non re