Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T., Vapi

2016 (6) TMI 444 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Benefit of penalty at reduced rate - Non payment of appropriate Customs Duty - DTA clearance - goods were imported against Duty Free Credit entitlement Certificate - Held that:- We find that undisputedly the appellant had imported inputs duty free packed in MS barrels availing the benefit of Notification No.53/2003Cus. Dt.31.03.2003; but failed to pay appropriate duty on the MS Barrels when cleared to Domestic Tariff Area. Since the appellant has failed to establish that MS Barrels are not capab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

62, in view of the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in G.P. Presstress Concrete Works case (2012 (8) TMI 933 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ) as such an option has not been extended to the Appellant by both the authorities below. - Appeal No. : E/921-922/2008 - ORDER No. A/10436-10437/2016 - Dated:- 19-5-2016 - DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. P.M. SALEEM, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Appellant : Smt. Radhika Chandrashekar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri N. Satwani, Auth .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ermission of the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner/ Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as required under the said notification read with sub-Para (d) of Para 6.15 of Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), 2004-09. Thus, Customs duty amounting to ₹ 1,22,972/- for the period from 07.12.2005 to 31.3.2006 was found to be recoverable and accordingly demanded from the Appellant. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and penalty of equal amount imposed under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962. Ag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dated 31.3.2003. Also, she has submitted that the demand of customs duty from them was erroneous. She has contended that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner vs. West Coast Gases Limited - 2003 (155) ELT 11 (SC), there is no requirement for reversal of credit availed on packing materials when received along with cenvatable inputs. Hence, on this analogy, they were not required to pay duty on MS Barrels on its clearance to Domestic Tariff Area. She .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o the facts of the present case. The Ld. Advocate further submitted that since the issue involved in the present case relates to interpretation of Notification No. 53/2003-Cus, therefore, imposition of penalty under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 is not warranted and not sustainable in law. Further she submitted that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in a catena of cases, including in the case of CCE Vs. G.P. Presstress Concrete Works 2015 (323)ELT709(Guj.), the appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version