TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the Respondent No. 2 on 23rd October, 1999 seeking clearance of certain goods. Show cause notice was issued in respect of the said bill of entry by the Respondent No. 2 on 19th November, 1999. Petitioner sought for certain information on 23rd November, 1999 in regard thereto. On 15th December, 1999 goods were cleared on provisional assessment basis against payment of Customs duty on furnishing of a bank guarantee of Rs. 1,31,555/-. On 27th December, 1999 another Bill of Entry No. 313508 was filed. On 20th January, 2000 as in the earlier case, goods were cleared on provisional assessment basis on furnishing of a bank guarantee of Rs. 1,30,254/-. On 31st March, 2000 Respondent No. 2 confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 2,61,809/- and directe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of recovery1. of dues during pendency of stay application before the Commissioner (Appeals), the matter was examined by the Board and necessary instructions were issued vide Circular No. 23/90-CX. 6, dated 12-12-1990 issued from F. No. 209/107/89-CX. 6 and Circular No. 16/92-CX. 6, dated 12-11-1992 issued from F. No. 208/59/92-CX. 6. According to these instructions. Central Excise Officers were to allow a period of three months from the date of decision for payment of dues adjudicated before resorting to coercive measure to recover such dues. However, if the stay application is rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals), even before the lapse of time of three months, recovery proceedings should be initiated immediately. The Commissioner (App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayant Dalal Private Ltd. 1996 (88) E.L.T. 638; Ranadey Micronutrients v. Collector of Central Excise, 1996 (87) E.L.T. 19; Poulose and Mathen v. Collector of Central Excise, 1997 (90) E.L.T. 264; British Machinery Supplies Co. v. Union of India, 1996 (86) E.L.T. 449. Of course the Appellate Authority is also not bound by the interpretation given by the Board but the Assessing Officer cannot take a view contrary to the Board's interpretation." 6.Above being the position action of Respondent No. 2 seeking enforcement of the bank guarantees cannot be sustained. Till disposal of the stay applications, the bank guarantees shall continue to be operative. However, the disposal of the stay application pending before the Appellate Authority would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
