9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 736X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the respondent and on perusal of the records, it is seen that the authorities below, taking into account the materials on record, have arrived at the following findings : "2.10 Advance license no. 21320 dt. 5-2-98 had been issued under para 7.3 of the Exim Policy 1997-2002 where under the noticee have been permitted duty free import of 52711 kg of Acrylic yarn and 9765 kg of polyester filament yarn (PFY) against an export obligation of 62000 kg of Acrylic blankets containing Acrylic 78% (48360 kg), polyester 15% (9300 kg). As per the records resumed from the 'Noticee', they had exported 71019.8 kg of resultant product. From the statement of exports, it was found that they had used 2010.04 kg of polyester filament yarn (PFY) includin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter of Oblum Electrical Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, 1997 (94) E.L.T. 449 (S.C.), and the Tribunal in the matter of Stumpp, Schuele & Somappa Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Exports), Chennai, 2006 (194) E.L.T. 437; Jaysynth Dyechem Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Export Promotion), Mumbai, 2001 (136) E.L.T. 1429; and an unreported decision of the Tribunal in the matter of Appeal Nos. C/38 & 39/06-Cus. delivered on 11th February, 2009 in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar v. M/s Kochar Sung Up Acrylic Ltd. and Shri Mohinder Singh, and the Board's Circular No. 36/97-Cus. dated 16th September, 1997, submitted that, the applicants have made out a, prima facie, case for the grant of stay of the impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in the matter in hand i.e. Notification No. 30/97-Cus. requires actual user of the materials in the manufacture. 6. The Tribunal in the matter of Stumpp, Schuele & Somappa Ltd. (supra) was dealing with the matter relating to the Notification Nos. 116/88-Cus, 159/90-Cus and 204/92-Cus., wherein the phraseology was different from the one used in the Notification No. 30/97-Cus. Similarly, in the case of Jaysynth Dyechem Ltd. (supra), the matter related to the Notification No. 204/92-Cus., where again the phraseology was different from the one used in Notification No. 30/97-Cus. 7. The Board's Circular No. 36/97-Cus., dated 16th September, 1997 though refers to Notification No. 30/97-Cus. was in relation to totally different subje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... since the applicants have brought to our notice the decision of the Tribunal in favour of the assessee in Appeal Nos. C/38 & 39/06-Cus., in our opinion, prima facie, case has been made out for grant of stay in relation to the demand of penalty amount. 10. Taking into consideration the fact that no case of any financial hardship being made out and bearing in mind the Revenue's interest, the applications for stay, therefore, are partly allowed to the extent of waiver of the penalty demanded under the impugned order till the disposal of the appeals. Duty demanded along with interest shall be deposited within a period of eight weeks from today. To come up for reporting compliance on 10th August, 2009. Subject to the deposit of the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
