TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the installation has to be made within the Central Excise Registered factory. The word premises mentioned in the Notification is wide enough to cover the entire stretch where the pipelines were installed in this case. It is an integrated factory to manufacture Iron Ore Pellets from raw material. The EODCs were issued by the DGFT only after satisfying themselves that all the conditions specified in the Licence have been fulfilled. We also find that after issue of EODC, the Custom Department cancelled the Bond and bank guarantee executed by the Appellant. The Department has cancelled bond and bank guarantee after satisfying that the Export Obligation was fulfilled and EODC was produced and the Appellant has satisfied all the conditions of the Notification or the licence. Hence, both DGFT and Customs Department has come to the conclusion that the Appellant has fulfilled all the conditions of the Notification or the Licence. Extended period of limitation - Suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- There is no suppression involved in this case. Consequently the demand confirmed in the OIO as well as penalties imposed are not sustainable on the ground of limitation also. How ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were required for the pre-production, production and postproduction of such Iron Ore Pellets. The Appellant applied for four EPCG Licenses in respect of the Pipes required for movement of the concentrate from Barbil to Jajpur and for sourcing water from a nearby river for manufacture of concentrate and for depositing the tailings, generated in the manufacture of concentrate. 5. The pipes were imported during the period July 2008 to January 2010 under EPCG licenses and were installed at the locations where the installation of the pipelines was disclosed in the EPCG application filed with the DGFT. On the basis of the EPCG licenses issued by the DGFT, benefit of concessional rate of duty of 3% in terms of the operationalizing Notification No.64/2008-Cus. was availed. 6. Upon installation of the imported pipelines, the Appellant wrote to the jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities for issuance of installation certificates as required under the FTP as well as the operationalizing notification. While the Jurisdictional Authorities issued certificates to the extent of pipelines installed in the factory at Jajpur and Barbil, the Appellant was directed to procure certificates from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Madras Cements Ltd. [2015 (325) E. L. T. 239 (SC) wherein it was held that CENVAT Credit on inputs received and used in captive mines would be considered to be received in the factory and allowed if the said mines constitute an integrated unit together with the manufacturing facility. (iii) They further submitted that the present dispute relates to the FTP and Customs law, which, unlike the Central Excise Law, is not concerned with a particular manufacturing unit registered separately for the purpose of Central Excise. 11. The Appellant further submitted that even assuming without admitting that the imported pipelines were not installed in the factory of the Appellant, it cannot be denied that the said pipelines were installed in the premises of the Appellant and hence, the conditions of the operationalizing notification stand fulfilled. 12. They further submitted that they have obtained right of way permission/license for the entire land on which the pipelines were installed and consequently, the pipelines stood installed on their premises itself. Consequently, they submitted that the condition of the operationalizing notification stood satisfied even if it wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be denied to the Appellant. 17. They also submitted that the non-installation in the approved premises can be treated as a procedural lapse, so long as the substantive condition of manufacture of export products using the installed capital goods and consequent fulfillment of export obligation is fulfilled. Such a lapse can be condoned and the exemption benefit can be extended as held by this Tribunal in the case of Regency Ceramics Ltd.[2018 (363) E. L. T. 293 (Tri.-Chennai)], Vency Creation [2019 (369) E L. T 1126 (Tri.-Ahmd.)]; Marico Ltd. [2019 (369) E L T 1175 (Tri.-Mumbai)]. 18. They submitted that the Customs Department has erred in presuming that the period of limitation under Section 28 of the Customs Act did not apply in the present case. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions: Bombay Hospital Trust [ 2005 (188) ELT 374 (T-LB) and Mediwell Hospital and Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. [1997 (89) E. L. T. 425 (SC)]. In this context, they submitted that these decisions dealt with post-import conditions that were of a continuing nature (e.g. using the imported goods to serve weaker sections of the society), whereas in the present case, there is no suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09/05/2008 and Para 5.32 of the Handbook of Procedures of FTP stood violated in as much as the imported pipelines were not installed at the premises mentioned in the EPCG licenses, which is the manufacturing premises/factory. 24. We find that the Department had inferred the Central Excise registered factories at Barbil and Jajpur as the approved premises . As the pipelines were not entirely installed within the Central Excise Registered factory premises, the department contended that they are not eligible for the concessional rate of Customs Duty. In the Notice, it is alleged that the importer has violated condition No.7 of Notification 64/2008-Cus. dated 09/05/2008 .For the sake of easy reference the relevant condition number 7 of the said Notification is reproduced below:- (7) that the capital goods imported, assembled or manufactured are installed in the importers factory or premises and a certificate from the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, is produced confirming installation and use of capital goods in the importer s factory or premises, within six months from the date of completio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of EODC, the Custom Department cancelled the Bond and bank guarantee executed by the Appellant. The Department has cancelled bond and bank guarantee after satisfying that the Export Obligation was fulfilled and EODC was produced and the Appellant has satisfied all the conditions of the Notification or the licence. Hence, we find that both DGFT and Customs Department has come to the conclusion that the Appellant has fulfilled all the conditions of the Notification or the Licence. 28. We also find that while issuing installation Certificate, the Jurisdictional Authorities issued certificates to the extent of pipelines installed in the factory at Jajpur and Barbil. The Appellant was directed to procure Certificates from Independent Chartered Engineers for the remaining pipes as per Circular No. 14/2008 dated 26/09/2008. Consequently, the Appellant has obtained installation Certificate from independent Chartered Engineers, thus fulfilled the directions of the Jurisdictional Authorities. Thus, we find that the Appellant has fulfilled all the conditions stipulated in the Notification 64/2008 Cus dated 09/05/2008. 29. In support of their claim that in an integrated facility the area ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. reported in 2005 (190) ELT 7 (SC) wherein Modvat Credit on ropeway which connects mines with the factory was allowed as being in the nature of capital goods required for the manufacture of final product. The Appelant also referred the Tribunal decision in the case of Commissioner Vs. Pepsico India Holdings 2001 (130) ELT 193 (Tri) wherein PVC pipes used outside the factory for the purpose of drawing water from the well situated 200 Mtrs away from the factory was considered as only an extension of pipeline inside the factory to be used within the factory premises. 32. We find that the ratio of the above said decisions are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case and accordingly we hold that the pipeline used for bringing the slurry from Barbil to Jajpur can be considered as used within the factory , for the purpose of extending benefit of the Notification 64/2008 Cus dated 09/05/2008.. 33. In their grounds of Appeal, the Appellant also raised the issue of Limitation under Customs Act, 1962. They stated that they have submitted copies of all the EPCG Licenses issued by the DGFT to Customs Authorities. In the Licenses it has been clearly indicated that the install ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
