TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4440 Pcs. of Ladies Coaty valued at Rs. 12,63,446.40 packed in 74 bags were not manufactured by the appellants. Instead they were found to be manufactured by M/s. Uday Manufacturers, M/s. Woolways India Ltd. and M/s. Gee Sons Knitwear as per the tags/labels found attached to these goods. Consequently, the proceedings were initiated against the party. The party, however, vide their letter dated 28-8-97 requested the customs authorities to allow the shipment otherwise their export orders were liable to be cancelled and their export obligation period under DEEC scheme would also have expired on 31-8-97. The goods were accordingly allowed to be exported, as such. The party dispensed with the show cause notice. The Addl. Commissioner (Export), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e exporter made an attempt to export the goods in contravention of the DEEC scheme by mis-declaring the goods as manufactured by them. He further observed that the exemption under Notification No. 204/92 was subject to several conditions which inter alia stipulated that the imported material shall not be disposed of or utilised in any manner till the export obligation has been discharged in full and the export proceeds realised. He therefore held that the party attempted to export the bought out items as manufacturer exporter in clear contravention of the provisions of the DEEC Scheme. Consequently, he held that 4440 Pcs. of ladies coaty already exported are liable to confiscation under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. He however ga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bels of these manufacturers; that these goods were not manufactured by the appellants themselves; that if the goods were intended to be procured from other manufacturers, their names as job workers should have been got endorsed in the Advance Licence as per Para 120 of the EXIM Policy 1992-97. This para is reproduced below : Actual user condition and facility of co-manufacturers : "120. The licence granted under this scheme shall be subject to the Actual User condition till redemption of BG/LUT. The licence holder is free to have the material processed through any other manufacturer including a jobber. However, the licence holder under this scheme shall be solely responsible for the imported items and fulfilment of export obligation. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable only if the manufacturer who is also a licence holder desires the fabricator to become a joint and several obligation as a co-licencee for import of goods in his or in joint-names or submit BG/LUT in joint names then the endorsement of fabricator is required otherwise it is required only in the case of Merchant-Exporters and that this condition is not applicable in the case of appellants. I have considered these submissions and find no force in them. The above are the mandatory conditions in respect of the Advance Licence granted under the DEEC Scheme to the appellants and the same are applicable with equal force to the manufacturer/exporter as well as to the merchant-exporter. It is very clearly stated in the above para, "If th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
