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

M/s Meenakshi International Versus CC (I&G) , New Delhi

2016 (11) TMI 851 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

SEZ unit - import gold and export manufactured gold jewellery and are a net foreign exchange earner under SEZ scheme - earrings were rejected by the foreign buyer due to polishing defect; and returned jewellery weighing 2294.840 gms. The defective jewellery weighing 2294.840 gms., imported by the appellant vide Bill of Entry No. 2062 dated 22.04.2009 was exchanged with well polished jewellery weighing 2294.840 gms., which was seized by Customs on 26.04.2009 - Whether the appellant removed duty f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

go, New Customs House, New Delhi had no jurisdiction to confiscate these goods and impose penalty on the appellant and it is only the Joint/ Dy. Commissioner/ Asstt. Commissioner of Customs, in Noida SEZ Unit, who had the jurisdiction to take necessary action - The customs did not have jurisdiction within Special Economic Zone established under SEZ scheme by the Ministry of Commerce, Government of India and present proceedings initiated by the customs were beyond jurisdiction. Therefore, imp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h interest on 2294.840 gms on duty free jewellery import and penalty of ₹ 50,000/- have been confirmed. 2. Appellant has been represented by Sh. J.M. Sharma, ld. Consultant and Revenue has been represented by Sh. K. Poddar, ld. AR. 3. Appellant is functioning from Noida Special Economic Zone since the year 2004. Matter pertains to the period of year 2009. The appellant mentions that they import gold and export manufactured gold jewellery and are a net foreign exchange earner under SEZ sche .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t removed duty free imported gold jewellery 2294.840 gm. valued at ₹ 29,44,823/- involving custom duty of ₹ 3,35,795/- without payment of custom duty in a clandestine manner. Therefore, the duty and interest is recoverable from the appellant under Section 28 read with Section 28AB of Customs Act, 1962 read with Section of SEZ Act, 2005 and Rule 34 of Special Economic Zone, 2006. 4. The appellant mainly submits that: (i) SEZ is considered a foreign territory for the purpose of trade o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ivities within the SEZ. (iii) That duty free import/ procurement of all goods by SEZ unit is permitted as per the provisions contained in Section 26 of the SEZ Act, 2005 and not under Customs and Central Excise Laws. The dispute regarding utilisation of goods imported by availing exemption under provisions of SEZ Act or rules can only be adjudicated as per the provisions of SEZ laws. (iv) The procedure regarding search and seizure contained in Section 22 read with Section 21 of SEZ Act, 2005 wer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eizure and recovery of duties shall be carried out under the SEZ Act, 2005 and Rules made thereunder and not under the provisions of Customs Act, 1962. (vi) Mere invocation of inapplicable provisions of law in the SCN which were disputed by the appellant in reply dated 05.12.2009 to SCN dated 15.10.2009 will not give jurisdiction to the adjudicating authority to adjudicate disputes arising in the SEZ governed strictly by the SEZ Act, 2005 and Rules made thereunder. 4.1. Appellant relies on the f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. Gandhi vs. Union of India 2010 (257) ELT 168 (Guj.) and Morgan Tectronics Ltd. vs. CC, New Delhi 2005 (316) ELT 276 (Tri. Del.) make the matter clear. CESTAT, Delhi in the case of Morgan Tectronics (supra) has inter-alia in para 8 of its decision observed as under: 8. Moreover, in terms of the Section 53(1) of the SEZ Act, 2005, the SEZ is deemed to be territory outside the Customs Territory of India, and the goods imported were meant for the unit in SEZ Noida. In our view, the Commissioner of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| 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