Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (6) TMI 1133 - CESTAT BANGALORE100% EOU - warehousing period - extension of warehousing period - delicensing of warehouse - Held that: - When any warehouse is delicensed, the goods may be deposited therein without payment of duty. But if such goods continued to be stored therein without payment of duty even after the warehousing period is over or the warehouse is de-licensed, the goods are deemed to have been removed improperly in violation of provision of Section 71 of the Customs Act, 1962. Under such circumstances, the duty on the said goods is liable to be discharged in terms of provisions of Section 72 (1) (b) ibid. Similar provision exists in Central Excise Law also in respect of goods procured duty free by EOUs. Since in this case the goods deemed to be removed by HCL, were not acquired into any other warehouse by Sykes, the responsibility for paying the duty lies upon the consigner i.e. H.C.L - it would suffice, if the appellant is asked to pay interest on the duty liabilities for the above period in respect of both imported and indigenous goods. The necessity for EOUs for separately obtaining extension of warehousing period for capital goods each time has been done away with vide Board Circular No.7/2005 Cus. dated 14.02.2005 - there is no justification for either demand of duty or confiscation of the goods lying in the bonded warehouse. Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|