Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Dewas Fabrics Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore

2016 (1) TMI 436 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

100% EOU - Misuse of the scheme - failure to fulfill the export obligations - appellant contended that the only ground on which the demand against the appellant have been confirmed is that of cancellation of LOP and their status as 100% EOU by the Development Commissioner - 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. - Held that:- It is seen that the Original Authorit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rent 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 ex .....

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) ORDER Per B. Ravichandran There are two appeals against order-in-original No. 42/ Commr/CEX/IND/2009 dated 22/12/2009 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore. One is by the assessee company, the other one is by the Director of the main appellant. Both these appeals are taken up together for disposal. The main appellant was engaged in the manufacture and export of yarn, manmade fabrics, readymade garments etc. They were approved as a 100% EOU and were granted necessary permissions in this re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed 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 appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xcise duty of Rs. ₹ 4,02,21,517/-for the period 2000-2001 to 2004-2005. He imposed a penalty of ₹ 105,09,22,028/- on the main appellant and a penalty of ₹ 50,00,000/- on Shri Vijay Vishwaroop, Director of the main appellant. Goods valued ₹ 1,99,13,38,114/- were ordered to be confiscated; as they are not physically available, a redemption fine of ₹ 1,00,00,000/- was imposed on the main appellant. Aggrieved by this order, the present appeals have been filed. 4. The le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ispute. It is also a fact that 4 different notices have been issued covering the periods which are also 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 b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

demand and penalty as ordered by the Original Authority is sustainable. However, when specifically asked about the already demanded/confirmed amounts against the appellant being part of the present demand also, she conceded that since the present demand is in respect of the raw material procured covering the whole period of existence of the EOU, the demands already confirmed are apparently part of the present demand. She also submitted that this aspect may have to be re-examined by the Original .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d that the impugned order was passed in a summary manner without taking into consideration the export performance of the appellant and also the confirmation of demands for the same period through earlier 4 show cause notices. He has not specifically contested the possibility of appellant not fulfilling certain export obligation resulting in 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 .....

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 records that the LOP of the appellant was cancelled and the unit was closed. The appellant failed to fulfill the export obligation and they have not submitted the statutory returns. The Original Authority felt that there is no chance of the appellant be ever fulfilling the export obligation. 9. Regarding the show cause notices already issued and confirmed the Original Authority records the following finding :- "Therefore, a doubt had arisen as to whether the demand raised under the instan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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