TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant. Smt. R. Bhagyadevi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. The appellants imported 215.07 MTs of Whole Squid from New Zealand and had cleared the same under three Bills of Entry dated 18-6-97, 4-7-97 and 16-7-97 by availing the benefit of Customs Notification No. 32/97, dt. 1-4-97. The Notification had exempted from payment of Basic Customs Duty and Additional Customs Duty, goods imported into India for processing and re-export to the overseas supplier or to any other person specified by him. Such re-export should be completed within 6 months from the date of clearance of the imported goods or within such extended period as might be allowed by the Asst. Commissioner of Customs. The jobb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned, but the party could not produce any such evidence. Thereupon, the adjudicating authority confirmed the above demand of duty (without interest) against the appellants. This decision was affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal of the party. 2. Heard both sides. It was submitted by ld. Counsel for the appellants that the export obligation in relation to the imported goods could not be discharged due to reasons beyond their control as admitted by the lower authorities and no part of the imported goods had been sold, loaned, transferred or otherwise disposed off. The entire quantity, barring a small part, of the goods was available in stock. In the circumstances, it could not be said that the appellants had viol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on due to reasons beyond their control has been accepted. It is on the ground of violation of condition (iii) of Notification No. 32/97-Cus. ibid by the appellants that the lower authorities have demanded duty from them. This condition reads thus: that the goods are utilized only for the discharge of export obligation and no part thereof shall be sold, loaned, transferred or otherwise used or disposed off. It is not in dispute that any part of the squids imported by the appellants was sold, loaned, transferred or otherwise used or disposed off by them. As a matter of a fact, the party offered to surrender the goods to the Customs for destruction. As held by the lower authorities, the appellants were incapable of discharge of export ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000, long after the expiry of the normal period of limitation. The original authority, while ruling out recovery of interest on duty from the appellants under Section 28AB of the Customs Act, held that there was no collusion, wilful mis-statement of facts or suppression of facts on the part of the importer. This finding of the original authority was affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) also and the same has not been challenged by the Revenue. It would follow that the proviso to Section 28(1) of the Customs Act was not invocable for demanding duty from the appellants, even if it be assumed that the duty was due from them. 6. In the result, the appeal succeeds both on merits and on limitation. The impugned order is set aside and the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
