TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Madan, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)]. M/s. STI India Ltd. (STI), an EOU based in Indore imported High Speed Diesel Oil (HSD) during the period 1-3-1999 to 31-7-2004, through Kandla Port and cleared the consignments against warehousing Bills of Entry. The consignments of HSD were assessed under Notification No. 53 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the above additional duty of customs. Adjudicating the Show Cause Notice, the Commissioner of Customs, Indore accepted the plea of the appellant as regards limitation and confirmed the demand to the extent of Rs. 54,72,063/- under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act) as against the proposed demand of Rs. 2,57,73,158/-. He demanded interest on the duty demanded under Section 28AA of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be any demand under Section 28 of the Customs Act. The demand is therefore not sustainable. As there is no finding that the appellant committed any act of omission or commission rendering the goods liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, we find that no penalty is imposable on the appellants under Section 112 of the Act. 5. In Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. CC (Preve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the warehoused goods from the appellant. We also hold that in the absence of a Notification issued under Section 25 of the Customs Act, the impugned goods had to discharge additional customs duty when cleared for home consumption, though the exim policy had mentioned that EOU could import goods without payment of any duty. 7. The appeal is allowed. (Pronounced in open Court on 14-11-2007) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
