TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 771X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt itself needs to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/431/2009 - Final Order No. A/30608/2018 - Dated:- 22-5-2018 - Hon ble Mr. M. V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Mr. P. V. Subba Rao, Member (Technical) Shri Karan Talwar, Advocate for the Appellant Shri B. Guna Ranjan, Superintendent/AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order Per : M. V. Ravindran ] 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 06/2009 (G) CE, dated 30.01.2009. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The relevant facts for consideration, after filtering out unnecessary details are appellant herein is a 100% EOU engaged in the business of manufacturing instant/soluble coffee, duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on that these goods were used in the factory premises and prior approval was there on record subsequently post facto approval was applied for and it was granted by Ministry of Commerce Industries, Office of the Development Commissioner, Visakhapatnam Special Economic Zone, Visakhapatnam vide letter dated 07.01.2009. He would submit that since the post facto approval is there, their appeal may be disposed. 5. Ld. DR on the other hand submits that the goods which have been procured are not capital goods. It is his submission that the lower authorities in coming to such a conclusion with provisions of Notification No. 22/2003 as amended, will not apply. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made, we find that on factual matrix ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CT-3 for a total value of ₹ 61,26,296/-. Yours faithfully, Sd/- V. Bhaskara Rao Asst. Development Commissioner Copy to the Asst. Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Guntur Division, Guntur. 7. It can be seen that the Ministry of Commerce Industry, Office of the Development Commissioner, Visakhapatnam SEZ has specifically granted post facto approval for procurement of the indigenous material in question. In our view, since there is no dispute as to the receipt and consumption of material and post facto approval from the Board, we hold that the impugned order on this point itself needs to be set aside and we do so. All other arguments raised by both sides are not addressed to in this order. 8. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
