Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (3) TMI 1195

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oulds, I find that they were cleared under Project Import Regulations against registered contract only after the registration of the said contract, the 8 moulds imported and cleared under Project Import Regulations is absolutely in order - neither any differential duty can be demanded nor the said goods are liable for confiscation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/181/07MUM - A/86100/17/SMB - Dated:- 24-2-2017 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Shri K.R. Bulchandani, Advocate for the appellant Shri V.R. Reddy, Asstt. Commissioner (AR) for the respondent Order The appeal is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 155/2006/CAC/CC (I)/AKP/Contract Cell/ dated 30.11.2006 whereby the ld. Commission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... benefit of Project Import Regulations was claimed by paying concessional duty and classifying the goods under CTH 98.01 as required under the Regulation. On 26.07.2005 plant site verification report was issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad showing verification of 8 imported moulds. The Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad after verifying the installation of machines and moulds issued plant site inspection report on 11.09.2006. On 11.11.1997, the Asst. Commissioner of Custom, Group VI, issued a show-cause notice proposing why contract should not be de-registered and benefit of project import be denied. On 05.04.2005 the appellant submitted a letter to the Contract Cell of Customs, forwarding the documents inc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erates the findings in the impugned order. 6. I have carefully considered the submission of both sides and found that there is absolutely no contravention of Project Import Regulations, 1986 committed by the appellant. I find that the total imports were made of 18 moulds. The 10 moulds were cleared without availing the benefit of Project Import Regulations, the appellant have paid applicable custom duty therefore once the import were not made under Project Import Regulations in respect of 10 moulds, no contravention or violation of Regulation can be alleged in respect of said 10 moulds. As regards remaining 8 moulds, I find that they were cleared under Project Import Regulations against registered contract only after the registration of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates