9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 937X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... try no. 8247479/17.10.2012 and no. 8765339/14.12.2012, with concurrent recovery of duty foregone of Rs. 4,60,15,779/-, under section 28 of Customs Act, 1962, along with interest under section 28AB of Customs Act, 1962, and confiscation of the impugned goods valued at Rs. 17,69,92,673/- under section 111(o) of Customs Act, 1962 subject to option for redemption on payment of fine of Rs.4,42,48,168/- in exercise of section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 and penalty of like amount under section 114A of Customs Act, 1962. 2. Admittedly, the imported goods were not installed after clearance but were stored in original condition pending acquisition of land for setting up of facility for manufacture of 'polymer products' in pursuance of memorandum of un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erated the obligations without considering the submissions made by the appellant. It is further submitted that the adjudicating authority had not ascertained the claim of export obligation having been fulfilled and, instead, appears to have relied entirely upon the non-issue of discharge certificate as trigger for demand of duty and other detriment. It is also contended that the time-limit for the installation of the capital goods having been extended by the Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC), it was only fair and just for customs authorities to push back the period for fulfilment of export obligation and to ascertain compliance thereof. It is also submitted that the adjudicating authority had not assigned any reason for not considering the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t had been preferred, exports had been undertaken. It would also appear to us that the deferment of time for installation does not, of itself, re-schedule the deadline for completion of export obligation. The imports had been effected in October 2012 and December 2012 with post-import fulfilment of the export obligation by 2018. 8. In the facts and circumstances of fulfilment of export obligation not having been evinced and the stipulated deadline prescribed in the authorisations not adhered to, the confirmation of duty liability, equal to the duty foregone, would appear to be reasonable. However, there is no finding on the entitlement for depreciation in proportion to the export performance established from the records. This would have a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
