Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + Commission Customs - 2002 (3) TMI Commission This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2002 (3) TMI 341 - Commission - Customs

Issues Involved:

1. Duty Demand Notice and Duty Liability.
2. Partial Fulfillment of Export Obligation.
3. Calculation and Payment of Duty.
4. Immunity from Fine, Penalty, Interest, and Prosecution.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Duty Demand Notice and Duty Liability:

The applicant, M/s. Puneet Resins Ltd., was issued a Duty Demand Notice dated 19-8-1998 by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, EPCG Group, Mumbai, demanding duty of Rs. 49,40,263/-. The applicant admitted a duty liability of Rs. 45,82,553/- initially, which was later recalculated to Rs. 42,33,821/- after accounting for partial export fulfillment. The Commission accepted the recalculated duty liability and allowed the applicant to pay the amount through encashment of a Bank Guarantee and additional payment.

2. Partial Fulfillment of Export Obligation:

The applicant had obtained an EPCG Licence for importing capital goods at a concessional duty rate, contingent upon fulfilling an export obligation. Due to the failure of the buy-back agreement with M/s. Sedai Kasei, the applicant could not meet the full export obligation. The applicant claimed partial fulfillment of the export obligation, which was certified by the DGFT to be 5.32%. This certification allowed for a set-off in the duty liability.

3. Calculation and Payment of Duty:

The Commission reworked the duty foregone to Rs. 45,85,223/- and accepted the applicant's claim for a set-off of Rs. 2,43,933/- based on the partial export fulfillment. The net duty liability was calculated to be Rs. 43,41,290/-. The applicant paid this amount through the encashment of a Bank Guarantee and additional payments, as directed by the Commission.

4. Immunity from Fine, Penalty, Interest, and Prosecution:

The Commission noted the applicant's cooperation and full disclosure of duty liability. Therefore, it refrained from imposing any fine or penalty. The Commission also granted immunity from interest charges, referencing the EPCG Scheme and relevant case law, including the CEGAT's Order in the case of Philips (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs. Additionally, the Commission granted immunity from prosecution under various Acts, including the Customs Act, the Indian Penal Code, the Central Excise Act, and the Foreign Trade (Regulation) Act.

Order:

The case was settled for a total duty payment of Rs. 43,41,290/-. The Commission granted immunity from fine, penalty, interest, and prosecution, provided the settlement was not obtained by fraud or misrepresentation of facts.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates