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 Neelam Steels, Shri R.P. Handa Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana

2016 (1) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Allegation of fraudulent export of goods to Nepal - demanding duty and denial of cenvat credit along with interest and imposing penalty on both the appellants - Held that:- As per the condition IV of the said notification no. 45/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 the goods were required to be presented before Nepalese custom office and who has to endorse the certificate of the goods received in Nepal and is required directly sent to the officer of the Custom in charge and it is the duty of the custom .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty can be demanded from the appellant and Cenvat Credit cannot be denied. As duty cannot be demanded from the appellant penalties on both the appellants is not imposable. With these terms, impugned order is set aside. Appeals are allowed with consequential relief if any. - Appeal No. E/3133, 3134/2009-EX(SM) - Final Order Nos. A/53404-53405/2015-EX(SM) - Dated:- 26-10-2015 - Ashok Jindal, Member (J) For the Appellant : Shri Sudhir Malhotra, Adv For the Respondent : Shri M R Sharma, DR ORDER Per .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

licensing scheme / DEPB scheme without following para 4.8(IV) and 4.8 (II) of the procedure of export to Nepal and Bhutan and the provisions of the notification issued under Rule 19 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2001-02. Therefore, after investigation a case was booked against the appellant and same was adjudicated converted into the impugned order. Aggrieved from the said order appellant is before me. 3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that in this case the appellant has issued invoices for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erefore, the allegation against the appellant is not sustainable. Consequently impugned proceedings are to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, Ld AR drew my attention to the notification no. 45/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 to say that the appellant has failed to produce the evidence from the importing country i.e. Nepal that they have received the goods mentioned in the shipping bill. Therefore, appellant has violated the terms of notification and hence the adjudicating authority has rightly dem .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

no. 45/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 to say that the goods after exit is allowed to be produced before the Nepalese Customs officers at the corresponding border check post along with original copy of the invoices. Thereafter, Nepalese customs officers shall deal with the original and triplicate copies of the invoice and return the duplicate copy after endorsing this certificate of goods in Nepal directly to the officer of Custom In-charge of Land Customs station in India and the said officer sha .....

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