9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (3) TMI 323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Waste/Rejects of their production to Domestic Market on payment of appropriate duty. 2. Officers of the Preventive Wing of Mangalore Division undertook an enquiry, pursuant to a seizure of Granite of certain dimensions, in the premises of a Private Limited Company viz. Banjor Minerals & Granite Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to BMGPL). Enquiries made, revealed that both these units i.e. YMGL & BMGPL had common Directors. A show cause notice was issued demanding - (i) Central Excise duty of Rs. 20,18,330/- calculated as equal to 50% of approximate duty levied under Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962 on 62,051,890 Sq. feet of Goods cleared clandestinely to Domestic Tariff Area. (ii) &nbs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. They were then sold by BMGPL a unit under SSI exemption or Excise Duty. That rough Granite was being received from YMGL. Therefore it is apparent that manufacturing and finishing activity as per requirements, were being conducted in the premises of BMGPL whose Polishing Machines was temporarily out of order. Therefore the conclusions arrived at by the adjudicator that BMGPL was floated only to canalize finished goods manufactured at YMGL and cleared from YMGL as 'waste' and then as Granite, into the Domestic Tariff Area, cannot be concurred with. The portions of facts, as relied upon in the notice itself militates against such an assumption or presumption. No such findings can therefore be arrived at. (b) The lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Yenepoya Minerals and Granites. Further M/s. Yenepoya Minerals and Granites Ltd. vide their submission dated 18-5-95 admitted that the lesser dimension material manufactured by M/s. Banjara Minerals and Granites are out of the waste materials supplied by M/s. Yenepoya Minerals and Granites Ltd. Since M/s. Yenepoya Minerals and Granites Ltd. have cleared the goods after obtaining permission from competent authority contravention of Sections 71 and 72 of Customs Act and violation of Sections 59 and 65 also does not arise." This finding and non-cancellation of the Licence/permission granted, has attained finality. This order has not been challenged in appeal. From these findings, it is apparent that the proper officer in charge of the E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore no ground to conclude that polished/excess goods were removed as 'waste', as is arrived at in the impugned order. 'Waste/Rejects' have to be understood by the concept of persons in that trade, in absence of any parameters fixed by a definition in the Tariff. Therefore what the E.O.U. could not export, due to reasons of Trade/ Export requirements would therefore constitute 'Waste/Rejects'. For such an E.O.U. The plea of the appellants, on 'Rejects arising in the Granite Industry' as recorded in the impugned order Paras 56 and 57, cannot be brushed aside, as has been done by the adjudicator, merely on the grounds of non mention of sizes on the invoice and reliance on the decision of TELCO, regarding waste of Iron and Steel. In that case t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds manufactured and removed from an E.O.U. is since genesis and is restricted only to such goods as are 'allowed to be sold' by the Development Commissioner. Relying on this decision, we also find, nothing amiss in YMGL not maintaining RG 1 etc. which being an E.O.U. they were not required to removal of goods excess or otherwise misdeclared, as alleged therefore cannot be also accepted. As removals were under physical supervision, we do not find any reason to indicate YMGL for removal of any goods from their premises in contravention of any law or procedure. There are no grounds available to arrive at or confirm the charges in the show cause notice issued to them. We cannot uphold the same. (f) When we as well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
