9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C J MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And MR AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Vipin Jain, Advocate for the appellants Shri RK Dwivedi, Additional Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER PER: C J MATHEW These appeals arise from order-in-original no. 13/2013/CAC/ CC(E)/YG/GR.VII dated 30th January 2013 of Commissioner of Customs (Export), Mumbai and pertain to the import of two 'harbour mobile c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was claimed by the appellants herein that though the original licence issued under the scheme was limited to duty saved of Rs. 60,59,395/- there was a subsequent enhancement by the licensing authority to cover the shortfall in the duty saved arising from the coverage of the present imports in the scheme. It was also their contention that the export obligation, in accordance with the scheme, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Act, 1962 besides imposition of penalties under section 114AA of Customs Act,1962 on the four other appellants. 4. We have heard Learned Counsel and Learned Authorised Representative at length. 5. As the two exemptions which were cited in the bill of entry are mutually exclusive, only the eligible concession/exemption could have been made extended to the import by the assessing officer. From t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r effecting any other import or was deficient in fulfilling export obligation to the extent of duty actually saved by resort to the scheme. In these circumstances, we find ourselves unable to concur with the adjudicating authority that the benefit of exemption under notification no. 97/2004-Cus dated 17th September 2004 should be rejected peremptively merely because coverage under two benefits was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
