Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (11) TMI 389

..... oner SEEPZ, Mumbai and without execution of the Bond - benefit of N/N. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003 - whether the appellants were right in clearing the lathes imported vide Notification No.53/97-Cus. Dated 03.06.97 to the domestic tariff area without permission of the Development Commissioner on the grounds that they were surplus in terms of Para 6.16 of the Import Export Policy? - rate of depreciation to be applied in terms of the Notification No.57/2003-Cus dated 31.03.2003 or in terms of the Exim Policy? HELD THAT:- The Appellants have cleared the goods to DTA or EPCG holders during the period August to September 2003. During this period notification No.53/97 was not in currency. Notification No.52/2003 was only operational. Therefore the same requires to be considered. This notification does not contain any condition 5 or 5a as in the case of notification 53/97 as per which the unit required to take permission from the Development Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner as the case may be. It is not the case of the department that the Appellant has not fulfilled the export obligation in terms of the Exim Policy. This claim of the Appellant is not controverted by the dep .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... 31.03.2003, is not available and duty ought to have been paid Customs Duty @ 25% CVD 16% SAD 4%; appellant did not file an Ex-bond Bill of Entry; but calculated depreciation @ 16%, 12% and 10% over the years; there was short levy to the tune of ₹ 9,57,934 and ₹ 3,86,642. Revenue issued SCNs which were confirmed by the original authority and upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, these appeals No C/610/10 and C/6111/10. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits DC/AC can permit the clearance of capital goods can be cleared subject to such permission of the Development Commissioner, in terms of Notification No.53/97-Customs dated 3.6.1997 and 87/2004 Customs dated 6.9.2004; the appellants submitted a letter, dated 22.4.2003, on 29.5.2003; as per EXIM Policy and relevant Customs Notifications, the depreciation rates were unchanged for the block 1997 - 2002 and 2002 - 2007; depreciation rates allowed as mentioned therein in the notifications. He further submits that in terms of Para 6.16, permission is required only when duty is not required to be paid; as the appellant cleared the surplus/absolute goods with the payment of appropriate duty, no permission of Developm .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... which was required for sale both to the Domestic Tariff Area and EPCG License Holders; the appellants further produced CBEC s letter issued vide F. No.305/83/94-FTT and DGFT s circulars relating to supplies made from 100% EOU unit to EPCG license holders; however, these circulars cannot be read in isolation but in conjunction with the condition under which the goods were imported. 3.2. Learned AR further submits that as per Para 4(a) of the Notification. No.52/2003-Cus date 31.03.2003, the Appellant was entitled to uniform rate of depreciation @ 10% per year whereas the Appellant applied 16% for the first year, 12% for the second and the third year and 10% for the fourth year on the basis of the Exim Policy 2002-07 in force at that time; rates of depreciation as per Notification were not aligned with the Exim Policy 2002-07 and departmental authorities were bound by the Board instructions; adjudicating Authority has rightly opined that the EXIM policy only fixes broad terms/guidelines for different benefits of duties of Customs and Central Excise to EOU, however, the actual duty benefits are given by the concerned Notifications issued by the CBEC; CBEC has also issued a Circular No .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... No.53/97 does not provide the depreciation rates; in that case depreciation as provided by the policy needs to be applied. 6. We find that the Appellants have cleared the goods to DTA or EPCG holders during the period August to September 2003. During this period notification No.53/97 was not in currency. Notification No.52/2003 was only operational. Therefore the same requires to be considered. This notification does not contain any condition 5 or 5a as in the case of notification 53/97 as per which the unit required to take permission from the Development Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner as the case may be. It is not the case of the department that the Appellant has not fulfilled the export obligation in terms of the Exim Policy. This claim of the Appellant is not controverted by the department. Therefore we find that the Appellants are entitled to clear the used capital goods in terms of the policy as well as the customs notification. In terms of Notification 52/2003, there is no provision for obtaining permission. Even if such a provision exist in the policy or custom notifications , it would not be the intent of the same to deny a substantial right of the appellants .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||