TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EPCG licence. There is no where any mention of any notification as held by both the lower authorities. Further, we find that this issue stands settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs Appu Hotel Ltd. (2010 (1) TMI 1163 - SUPREME COURT) where this Tribunal's order in the case of Appu Hotel Ltd. Vs CC Chennai (2008 (1) TMI 201 - CESTAT, CHENNAI) was upheld. - following the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement, we hold that the ratio of the above decision squarely applies to the present case as in the present case appellants have imported architectural light fittings claimed under EPCG licence No04500471/1/13/10/1/01 dt. 16.2.1998 covered under Notfn 28/97 - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. C/231/2005 - Final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowed by remand to the original authority. The adjudicating authority in the de novo order again denied the benefit and confirmed the duty and the same was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that they have imported the goods by licence covered under EPCG scheme. He produced copy of licence available at page 9 of the paper book and submits that Tribunal remanded the matter to lower authority to consider the Board's circular dt. 26.9.2002. The said authority held that circular issued was in the context of another EPCG Notfn 29/97 and not related to Customs Notfn 28/97 dt.1.4.97 and on this ground, the adjudicating authority denied Board's circular and also denied the bene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ism), various Hotel Associations and other individuals have, however, been representing to this Ministry for quite some time that service providers in the hotel sector actually need the aforesaid consumer items as well for rendering service and earning foreign exchange for the purpose of fulfilling export obligation under EPCG Scheme. Hence, it is not proper to restrict import of aforesaid consumer items to such service providers. It has also been contended that in the case of service providers, the situation is slightly different because, whereas a manufacturer exporter fulfills his export obligation under EPCG Scheme by exporting resultant product manufactured out of imported capital goods, the service provider earns foreign exchange by r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the assessee is against denial of the benefit of Customs Notifications No. 28/97 and No. 29/97 both dated 1-4-1997 (EPCG scheme) by the lower authorities in respect of chandeliers and light fittings imported by the assessee. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we note that, admittedly, the above items were covered by the EPCG licences whereunder they were imported. The denial of the benefit is on the ground that the items are not covered by the definition of capital goods given in the Notifications. We find that, under the above Notifications, service providers such as hoteliers like the appellants were eligible to import capital goods at concessional rate of duty under the EPCG scheme. In respect of Notification No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee did not fulfil other obligations under the EPCG scheme. 2. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeal filed by Revenue against the aforesaid Tribunal's order. By respectfully following the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement, we hold that the ratio of the above decision squarely applies to the present case as in the present case appellants have imported architectural light fittings claimed under EPCG licence No04500471/1/13/10/1/01 dt. 16.2.1998 covered under Notfn 28/97. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief. ( Dictated and pronounced in open court ) - - TaxTMI - TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
