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

M/s. Foxconn India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-IV

2017 (10) TMI 547 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Penalty u/s 117 of CA, 1962 - Held that: - It is indeed a fact that during the disputed period, the maximum penalty that could be imposed under section was only ₹ 10,000/-. Only with effect from 18.05.2008, the penalty under this provision was increased to ₹ 1,00,000/-. However, the adjudicating Commissioner had imposed a penalty of ₹ 2,50,000/-, which is without legal basis and thus requires interference - penalty u/s 117 is required to be reduced to ₹ 10,000/-. - Pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ekha Beevi C.S, Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) For the Appellant - Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnoose, Adv. For the Respondent - Shri B. Balamurugan, JC (AR) ORDER Per: Bench The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Mobile Phones, Parts of Mobile Phones and Networking equipments. They executed four B-17 bonds for a total value of ₹ 12.08 crores under the 100% E.O.U. scheme before Assistant/Deputy Commissioner, Poonam .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ey were exporting the finished goods to SEZ Units in India as well as to foreign countries. Besides this, they also cleared the goods into DTA without payment of duty by availing the exemption under Notification No.6/2006-CE, dated 01.03.2006 [SI.No.28]. The second proviso to para 6 of Notification No.22/2003-CE, dated 01.03.2003 states that no exemption will be available for the inputs used in the manufacture of goods sold in the DTA if the finished goods are non-excisable or leviable to " .....

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;nil" additional duty leviable under Customs Tariff Act read with exemption notification. The Tariff entry under 85171210 exempts Mobile Phones from payment of Customs duty at the time of import. As per Notification No.21/2005-Cus. dated 01.03.2005 and No.39/2005-Cusu dated 02.09.2005, parts and accessories of cellular phones are also exempted from payment of Customs duty and CVD at the time of import. Therefore, it appeared that appellants had wrongly availed exemption by contravening the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the time of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnoose submitted that the appellants are contesting only the penalties imposed. She argued that under section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962, during the relevant period (06/2007 to 02/2008, the maximum penalty that can be imposed is only ₹ 10,000/-. The Commissioner has imposed a penalty of ₹ 2,50,000/-. This is against the provisions of law applicable at the relevant time. Further, a penalty of ₹ 3,00,00 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| 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