9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 97 crores, has allowed redemption of the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 10 lakhs and has also imposed penalty of over Rs. 32 crores apart from demanding interest on the duty in respect of the applicant-PSU Fertilizer Company. The appellants seek waiver of predeposit of duty, interest and penalty and stay of the impugned order. Shri Joseph Prabhakar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants fairly states that the impugned goods imported namely urea, under the licence issued by the DGFT was required to be taken into the appellants-factory for manufacture of NPK Fertilizer. However, the same was packed and sold to authorized dealers to be used as manure for agricultural use by the farmers at the consumer price fixed by the Governmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n affidavit regarding the import of the impugned urea and its disposal. Today, the learned Manager and Company Secretary of the appellant-company has filed an affidavit before us stating inter alia as follows:- "3. Madras Fertilizers Ltd., the appellant herein, had filed Appeal No. C/324/2007 before the Hon'ble Tribunal against the Order-in-Original No. 6038/2007 dated March 21, 2007, passed by the respondents herein. (a) Total quantity of urea imported during the relevant period (1997-98 to 2000-2001) upto November was 5,21,028 MTs. (b) It is certified that the entire quantity of imported urea was sold to MFL Authorized Dealers either as urea or as complex fertilizers to be used as manure for agricultural use by the farmers at the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... violation of the import licence condition. The customs duty exemptions under the impugned Notification Nos. 11/97, 23/98 and 20/99 have no conditions specified against the relevant entry for urea. Hence, no condition of actual user or otherwise can be imported in to the customs duty exemption notification. The description of goods contained in the notification is "urea, for use as manure". It is the contention of the learned DR that even though there is no condition in the customs duty exemption notification, the description of the goods implies a condition that the imported urea should have been used for manure and the appellant should have produced end-use certificates showing use of urea imported by them as manure. Firstly, we find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... portion of urea for industrial use. Firstly, we are told that these are negligible quantities compared to the entire quantity of 2,22,345 MTs under import. Secondly, the Department has no figures to tell us the actual quantity so diverted and thirdly, if the dealers have diverted some quantity in violation of the Fertilizer Control Order, action is required to be taken under another law and not under the Customs Act. 8. In the light of the foregoing, we are of the view that the adjudicating Commissioner was not right in denying the customs duty exemption to the appellant-PSU in respect of the urea imported by them and sold by them under the Fertilizer Control Order and demanding a huge amount of duty of over Rs. 30 crores along with intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
