Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (10) TMI 795 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - re-warehousing of indigenously procured goods - N/N. 22/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003 - Revenue took a view that the benefit of N/N. 22/2003-CE was only available to the appellant as 100% EOU. However, since the appellant was converted from 100% EOU to an EPCG unit, the conditions of said notification were not fulfilled and the exemption contained therein was not admissible to the appellants - whether the 5% custom duty on the capital goods is applicable to the indigenous capital goods or the appellants are required to pay the duty which was forgone when the appellants availed N/N. 22/2003-CE? Held that: - The duty involved on such clandestinely removed machinery was 13,22,559/-, which was paid by the appellants along with interest at full rate. The Customs Bonded Warehousing License of the appellant was thereafter suspended vide order-in-original dated 8.8.2005 issued by the Assistant Commissioner. The appellants were, therefore, required to pay duty of Customs and Central Excise on the remaining capital goods which were brought under the bond - the effective rate of customs duty on the capital goods imported under EPCG Scheme is prescribed under Notification 97/2004 @ 5% whereas no such Notification has been issued under Section 5A of Central Excise Act prescribing a similar concessional rate of duty in respect of indigenous capital goods supplied under EPCG Scheme. The deemed equivalence given by the DGFT to the imported and indigenous capital goods for the purpose of calculating export obligation can not be transported to another act, namely, Central Excise Act under which the obligations for procurement of indigenous goods under N/N. 22/2003-CE were made by the appellant and B-16 bond was also signed by appellant. The conditions in N/N 22/2003-CE are binding on the appellant in terms of the bond executed by them and the concessional duty under Central Excise is not covered under the Scheme of EPCG. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|