Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 431 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (12) TMI 431 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Import of new radial tyres on a date after 24.11.2008 when imports of such tyres were restricted by DGFT in terms of Notification No. 64(RE)/20082004-2009 dated 24.11.2008 - Confiscation of goods - Imposition of redemption fine and penalty - Held that:- There was a proforma invoice of 13-10-2008 in response to which part payment of US $.14,300/- was sent on 18.11.2008 which was prior to the imposition of restriction on 24.11.2008. Thus there is certai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of CESTAT judgement in the case of P.T. Impex Pvt. Ltd. (2015 (4) TMI 642 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT) would be applicable. - Redemption fine and penalty is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. C/239/2010-CU(DB) - F. Order No. 53552/2015 - Dated:- 18-11-2015 - Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical) And Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) For the Petitioner : Shri O.P. Agarwal, C.A. For the Respondent : Shri Ranjan Khanna, D.R. ORDER Per R.K. Singh : Appeal is filed agains .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The ld. Consultant for the appellant states that while it is a fact that the import took place after the restriction was imposed on 24.11.2008 by DGFT, it had taken concrete steps for the import of the same prior to 24.11.2008 inasmuch as in response to the proforma invoice dated 13.10.2008 it sent part payment of US $ 14,300/- out of total US $ 37,016/- and having made such part payment it was not possible to back out without adverse financial consequenc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r is sustainable. 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. The contention of Revenue is there was no agreement between the appellant and the foreign supplier entered into before 24.11.2008 for supply of the impugned goods. However, an agreement need not always be in writing. In the present case, we find that there was a proforma invoice of 13-10-2008 in response to which part payment of US $.14,300/- was sent on 18.11.2008 which was prior to the imposition of restriction on 24.11.200 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

24.11.2008, the ratio of CESTAT judgement in the case of P.T. Impex Pvt. Ltd. (supra) would be applicable. Para 8 of the said judgement is reproduced below :- 8. In the light of the fact that the proforma invoice is dated 30-3-2006, the remittance for the value of sandalwood to be imported was also made on 30-3-2006; the customs invoice, the fumigation certificate and the Bill of lading, though issued later establish a concretised agreement for export of sandalwood prior to 7-4-2006 (when the r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version