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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur Versus M/s Modern Suiting Ltd. And Vice-Versa

2017 (11) TMI 725 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

EPCG License - N/N. 110/95-Cus - Concessional Rate of Duty - Held that: - From the first order, the direction which has been issued to the authority was very clear that the authorities below cannot stand by the Board circular that the period of warehousing has already expired. In these circumstances, we find it to be a fit case for reconsideration in the light of Board circular. Hence, the order impugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide afresh after .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ls dt. 23/1/2003 - the appellant is entitled to the benefit of circular. The same will be given to him and the goods will be released in the export 100% export oriented unit subject to the fulfilment of the condition. - Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - D.B. Central/Excise Appeal No. 22 / 2009, D.B. Central/Excise Appeal No. 3 / 2011 - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - K. S. Jhaveri And Inderjeet Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar with Ms. Archana For the Respondent : Mr. Anurag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and he has applied for 100% oriented unit. 3. Counsel for the appellant Mr. Jhanwar contended that the appeal of the assessee though preferred subsequently is required to be heard first inasmuch as if the appeal is allowed then the department appeal will not have any effect inasmuch as if the goods is required to be released pursuant to the government circular, the second appeal will become academic. 4. This Court while admitting the matter framed the following substantial question of law:- In D .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

learned CESTAT was justified in demanding duty, interest, rent and other changes on 27 looms imported under Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme which were allowed to be cleared under 100% EOU without payment of duty? 5. The facts of the case are that the appellant had obtained EPCG licences dated 06.09.1995 and 30.01.1996 for import of second hand looms on payment of concessional rate of duty of 10% in terms of notification no. 110/95-Cus. They imported the goods in 1996 warehoused the same in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e permission vide letter dated 31.08.1998. They also applied for the cancellation of EPCG licences issued by the DGFT authority and the same were cancelled in November, 1998. A show cause notice dated 12.03.1999 was issued on the ground that the goods imported under EPCG Scheme under Notification NO. 110/95-Cus and lodged in the warehouse have not been cleared from the warehouse even after the expiry of the warehousing period and that the condition of import under EPCG was not fulfilled. The ori .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ct of the said goods. 6. Mr. Jhanwar has pointed out that the Commissioner in subsequent year has totally derogated the observations made by the CESTAT in its order dated 23rd January, 2003 which reads as under:- 12. We find that in the present case as per the Revenue the period was expired in 1997 but the Revenue had not taken any action in respect of these goods. It was only on the request made by the appellants vide letter dated 3.11.98 for seeking permission to have private bonded store room .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e lying with the Customs are to be treated released subject to fulfillment of condition provided under 100% EOU scheme. The authorities below cannot circumvent the Board s circular by saying that warehousing period in respect of the goods have already expired. In these circumstances, we find that it is fit case for reconsideration in the light of the Board s circular. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for deciding afresh after aff .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the matter is that the goods are lying with the custom authority during the pendency of this petition. 9. We have heard counsel for the both the sides. 10. From the first order, the direction which has been issued to the authority was very clear that the authorities below cannot stand by the Board circular that the period of warehousing has already expired. In these circumstances, we find it to be a fit case for reconsideration in the light of Board circular. Hence, the order impugned is set .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ved as under:- I have carefully gone through the facts of the case and submissions made in reply to the show cause notice and submissions made during the personal hearing. I find in this case that the warehousing period in respect of two consignments imported on 10.10.95 and 20.04.96 had expired on 23.11.96 and on 20.04.97 respectively. Thereafter, an extension was given upto 20.10.97 and 23.10.97 respectively in respect of these two lots; but the goods were still not cleared by the assessee. Fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

use. Section-1119j) provides that any dutiable or prohibited goods removed or attempted to be removed from a Customs area or from a warehouse without permission to the proper officer or contrary to the terms of such permission shall be liable to confiscation. In this case, since no extension was granted by the Chief Commissioner, after the original extended warehousing period had expired, the goods could be considered as improperly removed from the warehouse and became liable to confiscation und .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s contained in the letter of F.No. 305/91/99-FTT dated 10.11.99 of the Board) Circular No. 75/99-cus) are not applicable in the present case. Therefore, the request of the assessee to allow these goods to be transferred to their EOU cannot be accded to. 11. Further I find that M/S Modern Suitings, Alwar were granted permission to set-up an EOU vide LOP (Letter of Permission) No. PER 208 (1998) EOB/150/98 by the under Secretary to the Govt. of India Ministry of Industry, EOU section New Delhi, Wh .....

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