9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Duty demand on imported inputs destroyed by fire accident.
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, the issue revolved around duty demand on imported inputs that were destroyed by a fire accident. The Commissioner initially held that the goods destroyed were not eligible for exemption, citing Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962, and the fact that the goods were insured and the insurance amount was already collected by the importer. However, the Commissioner refrained from imposing a penalty due to the lack of evidence showing clandestine removal of goods. The Senior Counsel for the appellants argued that the Commissioner's finding was not in line with the exemption notification 133/1994-Cus., which specifically exempts goods "destroyed within the Zone." The key contention put forth by the Senior Counsel was that the exemption notification in question exempts goods destroyed within the zone, which was not considered in the Commissioner's order. The appellants' argument was supported by the fact that para 7 of the notification explicitly provides for exemption in cases of destruction within the zone. On the other hand, the learned DR justified the Commissioner's order by emphasizing that the fire was a result of neglect or default, implying that the exemption may not apply in such circumstances. The judgment analyzed the exemption claim of the appellant based on the relevant portion of the notification, which exempts goods destroyed within the zone. It was observed that as per the notification, if imported goods are destroyed within the zone, no duty demand arises, and the goods in question were confirmed to be destroyed in the fire incident of 12th/13th May 1998. Consequently, the duty demand was deemed unsustainable, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and allowing the appeals of the appellants with any consequential relief to which they may be entitled. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, ruled in favor of the appellants, highlighting the specific exemption provision for goods destroyed within the zone under the relevant notification. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to exemption criteria outlined in notifications and ensuring that duty demands are appropriately assessed based on the circumstances of each case.
|
