Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 1254 - CESTAT KOLKATAEPCG License - cancellation on the ground that the Appellant was not entitled to import the capital goods under concessional rate of Customs Duty - seeking waiver of interest and penalty - HELD THAT:- The facts are not in dispute and both sides agree that the EPCG Licences were issued in 2007 but were cancelled by DGFT in 2013. So far as the Customs Duty initially saved is concerned, in terms of Notification No.97/2004-Cus and 64/2008-Cus, the Appellant has the liability to discharge the Customs Duty along with applicable interest as per Para 2(5) of these Notifications, if the conditions of these Notifications are not fulfilled. Therefore when Licence has been cancelled and Customs Duty is paid, the interest liability on such Customs Duty payment cannot be waived. Hence, the prayer of the Appellant to waive the interest is rejected. However, going through the documents submitted by them, it is seen that the Appellant has written a letter on 30/12/2013 submitted to the Department on 02/01/2014 wherein they have requested to Commissioner to realize the Customs Duty by encashing the Bank Guarantee. It is seen from letter F. No. S60(MISC)-265/14A.EPCG dated 12/08/2016 issued by the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, the Bank Gurantee has been enchased on 07/03/2014 and 25/02/2015. This means that the encashment is after more two months in respect of two Bills of Entry and after about one year four months in respect of the other two Bills of Entry. The Adjudicating Authority is directed to re-calculate and requantify the interest payable by taking the realization date as 03/01/2014 as their consent to the Department for encashment of Bank Guarantee was given on 02/01/2014 itself. Appeal disposed off.
|