9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ire, in the appellant's SEZ unit. The Commissioner while rejecting the application given the following reasons : I. The Customs provision of Section 23 in respect of remission of Customs duty is not applicable to the SEZ unit, as the SEZ unit is governed by SEZ Act, which overrides all other Acts. II. The appellant have not taken proper precaution to avoid the fire incident. III. The appellant, while taking the insurance policy have not covered the Customs duty but only Principle value of the goods is insured. Thus, the appellant have not taken care about the customs duty, which is public money. Being aggrieved by the Order-In-Original, the appellant filed the present appeal. 2. Shri. Sujit Ghose, Learned Counsel with Shri. Shubh D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rightly insured the only value of the goods. For this reason the remission cannot be denied. In support, he placed reliance on the following judgments:- M/s Satguru polyfab Pvt. Ltd V/s CC, Kandla reported as 2011 (267) ELT 273 (Tri.- Ahmd) M/s Jindal International v/s CC, kandla reported as 2013 (290) ELT 729 (Tri.- Ahmedabad) Sami Labs Ltd V/s. The Commissioner of Customs ( February 28th 2007) State of Haryana V/s. Dalmia Dadri Cement Ltd., 2004 (178) ELT 13 (SC) 3. Shri. Rajesh Nathan, learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that there is no dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms Act. The provision for remission of custom duty shall automatically apply. We agree with the submission of the learned counsel that only those provisions of other Act shall not apply, which are inconsistence with the provision of the SEZ Act. In the present case the grant of remission in respect of customs duty in terms of Section 23 does not contradict any of the provision of the SEZ Act. Therefore, the contention of the Adjudicating Authority about non-applicability of the Section 23 of the Customs Act, is not sustainable. 4.3 As regard the contention that the appellant have not insured the customs duty along with the value of the goods, we find that it is obvious that only the value of the goods is liable to be insured, which is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
