TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of entry claiming the exemption under Sl.No.5 of the Table to the said notification. Further it is found that the whole exercise is academic as no Revenue loss has occurred. In this view of the matter, the appeal is allowed. - Customs Appeal No.50912 of 2021 (SM) - FINAL ORDER NO.50901/2022 - Dated:- 29-8-2022 - SHRI ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Bipin Garg and Ms. J.Kainaat, Advocates for the appellant. Shri Divey Sethi, Authorised Representative for the respondent. ORDER Heard the parties. 2. The assessee is in the business of jewellery manufacturing. They also take jewellery out of India for exhibition purposes and thereafter, re-import the same. Such activities do not involve any revenue, subject t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir jewellery, which have been taken for exhibition vide shipping bill dated 4.7.2017. They also had claimed the benefit of notification no.45/2017 dated 30.06.2017, which provides for exemption on re-import of the goods, subject to the conditions, as mentioned in the said notification, re-imported within the specified period and the goods are identified being the same which had been exported earlier. The said notification further provides for total exemption of customs duty leviable under the First Schedule of the Tariff and further provides exemption from whole of the integrated tax (IGST), compensation cess leviable thereon under Section 3 sub-section (7) and sub-section (9) of the Customs Tariff Act. It is further provided in the said n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 28 with interest with further proposal to confiscation of the goods imported under Section 111(o) of the Act and further penalty was proposed under Section 112 (a)(ii) of the Act. 7. The show cause notice was adjudicated on contest and the proposed demand was confirmed along with interest and further penalty of Rs.10,000/- was imposed under Section 112 (a)(ii). It appears that no order of confiscation was made. 8. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide impugned order has recorded the finding that, admittedly, the appellant has not received any IGST refund due to non-transmission of data from GSTN. 9. It was the case of the appellant/assessee that neither they had paid IGST, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11. Further, the ld. Commissioner has recorded the findings that the appellant though has shown in the shipping bill, that the same is filed under the claim of IGST, but actually has not received any such refund, which is pending for want of data from GSTN. He further refers to CBIC Circular No.8/2018 dated 23.03.2018 read with Circular No.5/2018-Cus, which has provided for an alternative mechanism with officer interface to resolve the similar issues, which had resulted in no release of fund of IGST. 12. Having considered the rival contentions , I find that it is admitted fact that there was error in mentioning in the shipping bill at the time of export, that the same is filed under claim of refund of IGST. The admitted fact is that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
