9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicating authority and vide the second order mentioned, a duty demand of about Rs. 3.07 crores has been dropped by the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved of the same, the Revenue is before us. 2. The facts relevant to the case are as follows: 2.1 The respondent, M/s. PSL Ltd., is a manufacturing of coated pipes and the manufacturing is undertaken under Customs bonded/warehouse in terms of provisions of Sections 58 & 65 of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent acted as a sub-contractor to contractors, such as, L&T, Punj Lloyd Ltd. and National Petroleum Construction Co. Ltd., who were awarded contracts by ONGC for lying of pipelines, etc. in connection with the oil exploration /exploitation activities undertaken in the Bombay High. The bare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emption is available on coated pipes as such, subject to production of essentiality certificate from DGHC, the respondent had not claimed exemption and without claiming the exemption, the benefit cannot be extended. On the other hand the respondent had supplied coated pipes to Bombay High and hence the supply of coated pipes is an import transaction and liable to duty. Since the entire SEZ has been declared as part of the territory of India vide Notification issued under Sections 6 & 7 of the Management of Territorial Waters and Special Economic Zones and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976, the places where Bombay High and its installations are located, are part of India and therefore, supply of pipes form the bonded warehouse to another part o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the contention that since the goods have been manufactured in India, supply from the bonded warehouse to Bombay High would amount to export. In either case, the respondent would not be liable to pay any duty. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. 5.1 In the present case, it is not in dispute that both the bare pipes as well as the coated pipes were for use for oil exploration/exploitation and the essentiality certificate issued by the DGHC clearly evidence this fact. Though, the certificate specifically mentions serial No.215 of the Notification NO.21/2002, the finished products are also specified therein and the said finished products figure in List 12 to Notification No.21/2002, which also exempts the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
