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

2016 (11) TMI 38 - CESTAT BANGALORE

2016 (11) TMI 38 - CESTAT BANGALORE - TMI - 100% EOU - N/N. 13/81-Cus. dated 9.2.1981 - import of refrigerated trucks - de-bonding of EOU unit under EPCG scheme under N/N. .29/1997-Cus - furnishing of bank guarantee to cover the duty liability on the refrigerated trucks - SCN at the time of expiry of the bond and the bank guarantee proposing to enforce the bond to recover the dues - Held that: - the refrigerated trucks are used only for the purpose of transporting the frozen raw materials when i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ital goods and cannot be covered by the Notification No.13/81-Cus. - The decision cited by the learned AR in the case of International Creative Foods Ltd. [1997 (12) TMI 400 - CEGAT, MADRAS] is squarely covering the issue against the appellant. - Benefit of N/N. 13/81 not available - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - C/393/2006 - Final Order No. 21030 / 2016 - Dated:- 27-10-2016 - Shri S.S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Shri Raghavendra 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

13.5.1997 and proposed to convert their unit to a unit under EPCG scheme under Customs Notification No.29/1997-Cus. The de-bonding of the unit was done on 21.6.1999. At the time of de-bonding, the customs authorities raised demands towards customs and central excise duties payable on the capital and other goods in terms of the Customs Notification No.13/81. However, the liability of duty on the five refrigerated trucks imported earlier into the EOU was not decided. With a view to allow migratio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntee proposing to enforce the bond to recover the dues. In the Order-in-Original dated 24.8.2005, customs duty to the extent of ₹ 22,41,959/- was demanded, by taking the view that the appellant is not eligible for exemption under Notification No.13/81-Cus. inasmuch as the refrigerated trucks will not fall within the description of capital goods . When this was challenged before the Commissioner (A), the same was upheld and hence the present appeal. 2. The impugned order has been challenged .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

proceeded to enforce the bond and demand the customs duty without deciding the issue of eligibility of the benefit under Customs Notification No.13/81. The proposal in the show-cause notice is limited to enforcement of the bond. (iii) The departmental authorities have travelled beyond the scope of show-cause notice in deciding the issue of eligibility of Notification No.13/81. 3. Heard both Shri Raghavendra B. Hajer, learned advocate for the appellant and Shri J. Harish, learned AR for the Reve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ided that refrigerated trucks used for transporting frozen material to the factory for manufacture and for transport of final product from the factory is not eligible for the benefit of Notification No.13/81. He further submitted that the eligibility of the appellant for the benefit of the customs notification has been discussed in detail by the authorities below and hence it cannot be said that the decisions have been taken behind the back of the appellant. Accordingly, he prayed for upholding .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ification No.13/81-Cus. was not decided. To safeguard Revenue, while allowing the appellant s EOU to migrate to EPCG scheme, a bond was got executed supported by bank guarantee as security. In the said bond, the condition was specified as under: If M/s. Koluthara Exports Ltd., Aroor is liable for payment of Customs Duty on 5 Nos. of Truck Refrigeration Units imported availing of exemption under Notification No.13/81 Cus. dated 9.2.81 as amended vide B/E Nos.2380/26.11.93, 2383/29.11.93, 15515/5. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ellant is that they were not put on notice as to why the benefit of EOU Notification No.13/81-Cus. is not available for import of refrigerated trucks. They were only put on notice for the proposal of enforcing the bond and bank guarantee. Accordingly, their submission is that the Revenue has travelled beyond the scope of show-cause notice. 6.1 From the terms specified in the bond, we find that the same has been executed specifically to cover the difference in duty between that ordinarily payable .....

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