TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 605X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Customs (DEEC), Custom House, Chennai respectively. 2. S/Shri Krishna Kumar and K. Balasubramanian, Advocates, appeared on behalf of the applicant. Shri R. Jagannathan, Jt. Commissioner, Group 7 (DEEC), Custom House, Chennai represented the Revenue. 3. The applicant imported three consignments for a total quantity of 4293.014 MT non-alloy re-rollable scrap during the period from August, 2001 to December, 2001 for manufacture and export of steel products. Due to unfavourable international market conditions and non-availability of export orders, the applicant could not go ahead with their plans to fulfil export obligations in terms of the Advance Licence issued to the applicant by the JDGFT, Cochin, within the stipulated time of 18 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... initiated as the applicant have failed the conditions of Bond executed . 4. The Advocate submitted that in view of the foregoing facts, the applicant is now before the Settlement Commission for settlement of their case especially with regard to waiver of interest. The Advocate also pleaded for immunities against penalty and prosecution. 5. The Revenue was represented by Shri R. Jagannathan, Jt. Commissioner. He said that since the applicant had paid the duty, the Department had no objection for admitting the settlement application. However, he insisted that in terms of the Bond executed by the applicant, and as per contractual obligation, the applicant is liable to pay interest on duty of Rs. 77,80,051/-. 6. The Bench queried whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atio of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Union of India, 2004 (165) E.L.T. 499 (Guj.), proceeds to deal with the applicant s case. There is also a DGFT Policy Circular No. 25/2004-09, dated 30-3-2005, holding that cases involving export obligation defaults will come under the purview of Settlement Commission, for settlement of Customs Duty and interest. Having paid the Customs duty in full, the point at issue relates to waiver of interest on duty, demanded by the Customs authorities. 9. The Bench observes that the impugned goods were imported during the period August to December 2001 in terms of Notification No. 51/2000-Cus. dated 27-4-2000, which expressly provides for payment of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
