TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ported into India bristles without payment of Special Additional Duty of Customs (hereinafter referred to as SAD). The ground on which the benefit of this notification has been denied to the appellants as put forth by the Revenue is that they had violated the condition contained therein in the form of declaration that the sale of the goods shall not be affected from the place located in an area where no tax is chargeable on sale or purchase of the goods. This condition is said to had been accepted by the appellants at the time of clearance of the goods by furnishing declaration to that effect. They have violated this condition as they had sold the goods in Delhi and U.P. where sales tax was exempted by virtue of exemption Notification dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the goods at that time and but for these exemption notifications, the goods were otherwise chargeable to tax. It was only the payment of tax which was deferred/exempted under those notifications for the period mentioned therein. The exemption notifications did not render the goods non-chargeable to tax, but only allowed concession in the tax by way of exemption for some period. Therefore, the appellants cannot be said to had sold the goods from the places where no tax was chargeable on the sale/purchase of the goods and thereby violated the condition contained in the above said exemption Notification No. 34/98-Cus. In this view, we also find corroboration from the ratio of law laid down by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the scope of show cause notice and as such, the impugned order passed by it is liable to be set aside on this ground also. The ratio of law laid down in I.K. International v. CC, Amritsar - 2002 (142) E.L.T. 185 referred by the learned SDR is not attracted to the facts of the present case as in that case, the interpretation of another Notification No. 56/98 was involved. Moreover, the law laid down by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CC, Bombay v. New India Industries (supra) was not taken note of. In that case, the Bench also did not consider the question as to whether the exemption from payment of the tax on the sale and purchase of goods which were otherwise, taxable, amounted to chargeable to tax or not. The case of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
