9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Stay application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, exemption claim under Notfn. No. 53/97, denial of exemption by Deputy Commissioner, acceptance by Commissioner (Appeals) as part of Air Conditioners, requirement of item being used in connection with exports, certificate from Board of Approval not properly analyzed by Commissioner. Analysis: The judgment deals with a stay application seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 14,94,417/- and Rs. 10,000/- respectively, along with a stay on recovery proceedings. The applicants claimed exemption under Notification No. 53/97 for imported goods. The Deputy Commissioner initially denied the exemption, considering the items as building materials. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged that the items were not building materials but parts of Air Conditioners. Despite this, the Commissioner denied the benefit, stating they were not used in connection with exports. During the proceedings, the applicants, represented by Shri Raghuraman, argued that a certificate issued by the Board of Approval demonstrated that the items were indeed used in connection with exports. They highlighted that the Commissioner did not provide any findings regarding this certificate in the impugned order. The Revenue, represented by Shri Jagadish, presented their arguments as well. After considering the submissions and the certificate from the Board of Approval, the Tribunal, comprising S/Shri K.C. Mamgain and G.A. Brahma Deva, found that a prima facie case favored the applicants. They noted that the certificate had not been properly analyzed by the Commissioner. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the stay application unconditionally, indicating a preliminary assessment in favor of the party based on the presented evidence and circumstances of the case.
|
