Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (1) TMI 436

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... her there is overlapping of the quantification. It is apparent that there is overlapping demands as seen from the reason given by the Assistant Commissioner in his letter dated 22/05/2007. The earlier 4 show cause notices having been issued on different grounds is no reason for confirming the demanded amount again in the present proceedings. Even if they are on different grounds no discussion on such distinction has been made. As accepted by the learned AR the demands ave clearly overlapping. It is also clear that all the demands are linked to violation of the conditions of the notifications which granted excise/customs duty exemptions for the inputs used by the appellant as they are 100% EOU and certain export performance of appellants .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... enquiry regarding mis-use of the provisions of 100% EOU scheme by the main appellant. The enquiry revealed that the main appellant contravened various provisions of the EOU scheme resulting in non-payment of duties otherwise payable. 2. The main appellants were issued 4 different show cause notices for demanding duties in view of irregular concessions availed by the main appellant. Three of these notices were confirmed by the Commissioner. Consequent on these proceedings, a recommendation was made to Development Commissioner by the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for cancellation of LOP and the 100% EOU status of the main appellant. The Assistant Development Commissioner, Noida vide his letter dated 02/1/2006 informed the cancellat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... so covered in the present proceedings. Some of the demands made in the earlier show cause notices have also been confirmed, The present impugned order takes summarily the total value of goods procured, without payment of duty, either indigenously or by import during the whole of period from 2000 to 2005 and the duty on such goods have been confirmed. There has been no discussion of exports made by the appellant and proper quantification of duty on such raw materials which were actually put into the intended use in a EOU. The learned Counsel pleaded that the present impugned order is passed without any application of mind in a summary way and requires to be set aside. 5. The learned AR Ms. Neha Garg submitted that the main appellant consi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... requirement to pay the duty on the inputs procured without payment of duty. 8. We have carefully perused the impugned order. The learned Commissioner in his findings records that though repeated opportunities were given to the appellants to clarify their matter, the appellants have never came forward to present their side of case with evidence. They have not filed written reply to the show cause notice and have not attended the personal hearing afforded to them. The learned Commissioner observed that the behaviour of the main appellant prompted him to accept the allegations made in the show cause notice and he was convinced to that effect. He further records that the LOP of the appellant was cancelled and the unit was closed. The appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... different grounds no discussion on such distinction has been made. As accepted by the learned AR the demands ave clearly overlapping. It is also clear that all the demands are linked to violation of the conditions of the notifications which granted excise/customs duty exemptions for the inputs used by the appellant as they are 100% EOU and certain export performance of appellants. Further, we also find that there is no discussion or finding on the appellants claim regarding substantial exports carried out by them during the impugned period. 11. Considering the above position, we find it will be legal and proper to set aside the impugned order and to remand the matter to the Original Authority to examine and give his clear findings on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates