M/S TECMAX ELECTRONICS vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT)

Judgment text excerpt

$~50 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 28th August, 2025 + CUSAA 121/2025 & CM APPL. 53805/2025 M/S TECMAX ELECTRONICS .....Appellant Through: Ms. Vidushi Shubham & Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advs. (9718900060) versus THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shubham Tyagi, SSC, CBIC with Ms. Navruti Ojha, Mr. Rishabh Chauhan & Mr. Harish Saini, Advs. (9650049869) CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh J. 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. This is an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, inter alia, challenging the impugned order dated 7th January, 2025 passed by the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter “CESTAT”) by which the appeal of the Appellant has been rejected on the ground that the pre-deposit has not been made by the Appellant. Factual Background 3. The brief facts of the case are that during the relevant period between 2017 and 2018 the Petitioner had filed seven Bills of Entry for import of LED TVs and three Bills of Entry for import of brass ceramic cartridges. It is stated Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CUSAA 121/2025 Page 1 of 14 By:RAHUL Signing Date:02.09.2025 11:25:37 that the said Bills of Entry were assessed and cleared by the Customs Department. However, in respect of another Bill of Entry 3rd May, 2018 importing LED TV, the Petitioner is stated to have inadvertently classified the same as spare parts. The same were reassessed and pursuant to the same investigation was conducted on the ground of under-valuation and under- declaration of the imported goods. 4. In respect of the said investigation a Show Cause Notice dated 4th October, 2022 was issued to the Petitioner and pursuant to the same th