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 (10) TMI 413

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ission or commission be held liable to confiscation. Neither does the notice propose confiscation of goods under section 111 of Customs Act, 1962 nor does the impugned order render such a finding. In the absence of such finding on the goods that are alleged to have contravened the provisions of the Customs Act,1962 leading to confiscation under section 111 of Customs Act, 1962, there is no scope for invoking the penal provisions that arises therefrom. The impugned order is incomplete to that extent. It is found from the records that the appellant-assessee was in possession of a valid Quantity-based Advance License which has been noted in the bills of entry, that a utilisation certificate had been issued by the jurisdictional officer and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 06 of Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa leading to this appeal before us. 2. The assessee-appellant is a manufacturer of pig iron in blast furnace by reduction of iron ore with metallurgical coke; for the supply of the latter for conversion of imported coal by partial combustion, an entity by the name and style of M/s Sesa Kembla Coal Company Ltd was set up adjacent to their own. At a certain point in time, the latter was unable to function at full capacity owing to a modernisation and upgradation programme and assessee-appellant was compelled to import 27366 metric tons of metallurgical coke from China in March 2001 which was consumed between then and September 2001. It was alleged that the coke that had been imported did .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from the factory of assessee- appellant and that a demand confirmed on such presumptions and speculations was not sustainable. Countering this submission, Learned Authorised Representative relied upon a number of decisions including that of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Collector of Customs, Madras and Others v. D Bhoormull [1983 (13) ELT 1546 (SC)] and that of the Tribunal in AN Guha Co v. Collector of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar [1996 (86) ELT 333 (Tribunal)] to contend that it is sufficient for the tax authorities to establish contravention of the statute by circumstances without mathematical exactitude to shift the burden of establishing the contrary to the noticee. 5. We have heard the rival contentions offered by Learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erusal of the records, this would appear to be so. It is also seen from the impugned order that liability is crystalised for the contravention of the Rules supra. Though the impugned order does make passing references to the non-conformity with notification no.51/2000-Cus dated 27 April 2000, the contents are focused on the contravention of the Rules supra. 8. We find that the imported goods were entered for home consumption against bills of entry no.157/7.3.2001 and 283/13.3.2001 and that total duty of ₹ 4,20,38,438 and ₹ 1,18,04,859 has been foregone. In these bills of entry, the entitlement for duty exemption is attributed to notification no.51/2000-Cus dated 27 th April 2000. In a separate notation, there is reference to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is an aspect that the adjudicating Commissioner should have devoted some attention to but failed. The impugned order has not examined the specific provisions in notification no. 51/2000-Cus that had been violated by the assessee-appellant. The disposal of allegedly diverted nut coke by the alleged recipient has not been considered in the impugned order; in our opinion, this is critical to establishing non-conformity with the conditions attendant to import under Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate scheme. We find from the records that the appellant-assessee was in possession of a valid Quantity-based Advance License which has been noted in the bills of entry, that a utilisation certificate had been issued by the jurisdictional officer .....

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