9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest has been confirmed and penalty has also been imposed. 2. The appellant has been represented by Shri O.P. Agarwal, learned Consultant and Revenue has been represented by Shri S.K. Sheoran, leanred DR. 3. The appellant has been manufacturing various types of 'handicraft' and is a member of 'Export Promotion Council of Handicrafts' (EPCH), having permission to import chemicals/lacquer and sealers required for improved finish of export products without payment of Customs duty upto 5% of FOB (3% up to 9-9-2004) of export of handicrafts made by the appellant during preceding financial years on the basis of exemption certificate issued by Export Promotion Council of Handicrafts subject to the condition that the materials so im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;The appellant has referred to CBEC Circular No. 3/2010-Cus., dated 12-2-2010 wherein in Para 4, the Board has clarified that assessing authorities should normally accept the certificate issued by EPCH; the contents of the said para are given below : "4. It is hereby clarified that the assessing authorities should normally accept the certificates issued by the Development Commissioner (Handicrafts)/ EPCH A decision to reject the certificate issued by the Development Commissioner (Handicrafts)/EPCH certifying the goods as artware/handicraft should be taken only with the approval of the Commissioner of Customs/ Central Excise and after discussions with the certificate issuing authority. The exports should not, in the mean time, be held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 21/2002 would be available to them." 5.3 The appellant has pointed out that in case they claim the duty drawback treating the subject goods as 'furniture', they would be entitled to duty drawback of 5% of FOB value of the goods, which would have exceeded the total demand raised by the Revenue in this case. This indicates that there were no mala fides and no adverse motive on the part of the appellant claiming benefit of the Notification No. 21/2002-(Customs). Therefore, Revenue's stand that goods were not 'handicrafts' cannot be substantiated and is without any basis. 6. Based on above findings and discussions and following Tribunal's order (supra), the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
