TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) None for the appellant Shri Ahibaran, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER Per : C J Mathew The issue for resolution in these appeals lies within the narrow compass of whether an advance license holder, who having fulfilled the prescribed export obligation and transfers the license, can be held to be liable for recovery of the duty foregone on imports effected by the transferee for alleged breach of condition in the exemption notification against which the goods were imported. It is alleged that transferor availed CENVAT credit on inputs procured from the domestic market for manufacture of export goods which was a breach of condition of exemption. It is the conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as charged with breach of the condition of non-availment of credit. 4. Upon challenge before the Tribunal, the matter was remanded back to enable ascertainment of availment of credit of duty paid on indigenously procured raw material used in the manufacture of export goods. The demand and penalty are reconfirmed in the order impugned before us. We have heard Learned Authorised Representative and, as M/s Ring Gears India Ltd was unrepresented, have perused their appeal. 5. The scheme of duty free import as quid pro quo for fulfilment of export obligation is implemented through notification no. 203/92-Cus which permits duty free imports of raw materials by advance licence holders subject to various conditions; at the same time, the sche ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iable for confiscation without evidence of post-importation conditions having been breached. Availment of CENVAT credit, even if factually established which it was not, is a pre-importation occurrence by the licence-holder which does not conform to the frame-work of section 111 of Customs Act, 1962 that concerns imported goods and importer. The clearance afforded to the original licencee by customs authorities as a prelude to endorsement of transferability would have ascertained conformity with condition in the exemption notification. As the goods could not have been held to be liable to confiscation, there is no justification for imposition of penalty under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. Appeal of Revenue also fails on this count. 8. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
