9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Registration to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group-VI, Chennai and requested them to register the said contract under the Power Generation Project claiming benefit of Customs Notification No.16/2000 Sl.No.337(iv) under CTH 98.01, so as to avail concessional rate of duty on the goods of import. Along with the said letter, the importer annexed the following documents: (i) Application form in duplicate; (ii) Project Bond in duplicate; (iii) Letter of Indemnity; (iv)Essentiality Certificate from Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai. 2.2. The fourth enclosure to the letter dated 24.1.2001, referred supra, is a letter issued by the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, bearing Letter No.520/B2/2001-1, dated 19.1.2001, which letter has been extracted as a part of the order of the Tribunal. The said letter dated 19.1.2001 of the Government clearly states that the goods to be imported by the importer fall under the category of freely importable goods and they are not in the negative list of imports. It is also stated that the goods are covered under Heading 98.01 of the Custom Tariff Act, as appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 986 seeking concessional rate of duty requires submission of certain documents. They identified certain documents to be furnished by the importer for the purpose of granting such benefit. 2.7. The importer vide letters dated 3.7.2001 and 27.8.2001 sought further time to produce the required documents. Subsequently, by letter dated 30.4.2002, the importer enclosed a certificate dated 30.4.2002 issued by the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, reiterating the plea for granting concessional rate of duty on the import of the goods in question in terms of Notification No.16/2000. That request of the importer was considered favourably by the Department and the Bill of Entry was reassessed on 13.5.2002, extending the benefit conferred under the Project Import Regulations and the Notification No.16/2000. In the said reassessment order, there was a demand for payment of interest from 29.3.2001 till the date of payment of duty on the Bill of Entry in terms of Board Circular No.64/2000-Cus., dated 26.7.2000. On 14.5.2002, the importer paid the duty reassessed and interest under protest and goods were allowed to be cleared. 2.8. The Department has no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1962. Circular No.64/2000-Cus., dated 26.7.2000 F.No.438/36/99-Cus.IV Government of India Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi. Subject: Levy of interest on delayed payment of duty Relevant date under Section 47(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 reg. I am directed to invite your attention on the subject mentioned above and to state that a case was referred to Board for clarification on certain doubt regarding levy of interest for delayed payment of duty under Section 47(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 where the Bill of Entry for certain imports was assessed provisionally denying the benefits of EPCG Scheme, as EPCG licence was not produced at the time of assessment. The importer did not clear the goods. Subsequently, the importer got the EPCG licence issued and submitted to Customs. The Bill of Entry was reassessed allowing the benefits of EPCG Scheme thus reducing the duty liability on the importer. The importer paid the duty so reassessed. A doubt was raised whether the date of original assessment or date of reassessment would be relevant for calculation of interest under Section 47(2) of the Customs Act. Another doubt raised w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 17(4), it is noticed that this view of the Commissioner is not correct because it is not a case where they had withheld any information or it was a case of misdeclaration as can be seen from the provisions of Section 17(4) of the Customs Act. A perusal of the provisions of Section 17(4) would indicated that if subsequently on examination or testing of the goods or otherwise it is found that any statement in such entry or document or any information so furnished is not true in respect of any matter relevant to the assessment, the goods may, without prejudice to any other action which may be taken under this Act be reassessed to duty. Therefore the findings of the Commissioner that reassessment is permitted only under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act (even in a normal case where all the information furnished is found true) is not correct. The reassessment in their case has been done under Section 2(2) read with Section 47(1) & (2) of the Customs Act. It is further noticed that the department has not gone in appeal against the reassessment and since the issue envisages reassessment under Section 2(2) of the Act and since the customs have reassessed the goods on 13.5.2002 and the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... holding that all necessary materials required for assessment under the Project Import Regulations, 1986 were available at the inception, namely at the time of filing of the Bill of Entry. We also uphold the finding of the Tribunal that in the present case reassessment done on 13.5.2002 under Section 2(2) of the Customs Act was not on account of any withholding of information or mis-declaration. 10. We find from the records that the Department has made assessment on merits and thereafter extended the benefit of the notification based on records produced after the protest was lodged on 26.3.2001. The protest lodged on the assessment made on merits and the act of the importer in pursuing the matter to its logical conclusion would go to show that the importer has not accepted the assessment made on merits. In the present case, the stand of the importer was accepted by the Department on 13.5.2002, on the basis of the very same document which was already available on record on 24.1.2001, as enclosure No.(4). The letter of the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, dated 30.4.2002, does not in any way alter the situation inasmuch as the importer ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
