Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 552 - AT - CustomsAdditional duty of Customs - N/N. 30/2004 dated 09.07.2004 as amended - denial of exemption on the ground that credit of excise duty or additional duty of customs on inputs or Service Tax on input services has been taken - Held that: - similar issue of eligibility of importer for exemption under N/N. 30/2004 CE came up before the Tribunal recently in M/s Artex Textiles Pvt Ltd [2017 (9) TMI 1205 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where by relying on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SRF Ltd. [2015 (4) TMI 561 - SUPREME COURT], where it was held that appellants were entitled to exemption from payment of CVD in terms of N/N. 6/02. Legal position brought in by the amendment in the said proviso of Notification No.30/2004 - mplication of the amendment has been brought-out in the circular dated 21.07.2015 for better appreciation - Held that: - circular makes it clear that the amendment carried-out basically to make it clear that equal treatment should be given to the domestic manufacturers vis-a-vis importers. In other words, the amendment is to make the intention clear that the said conditions are to be satisfied by the manufacturers of such goods and not the buyer/importer of such goods. From the contents of the circular and also amended entry of the proviso in Notification No.30/2004, we note that the legal position laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on more than one occasions is continued to be relevant and applicable to the present case also. Admittedly, there is no Cenvat credit availed by the manufacturer of the imported goods, neither the buyer/importer availed any such credit. As such, we find the amendment will not act as a bar for extending benefit to the present impugned goods from payment of CV duty. The legal position with reference to levy of additional duty of customs was examined at length by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Aidek Tourism Services Pvt Ltd [2015 (3) TMI 690 - SUPREME COURT] and it was held that for the purpose of saying what amount, if any, of additional duty is leviable under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, it has to be imagined that the articles imported had been manufactured or produced in India and then to see what amount of excise duty was leviable thereon. The exemption of additional duty of customs extended to the respondent by the impugned order is legal and proper - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|