9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Duty demand at the rate of 15% for imports under EPCG Scheme. 2. Interpretation of DGFT notifications affecting customs duty rates. 3. Requirement of license endorsement for revised duty rates. Analysis: 1. The appeal challenged a duty demand of 15% on imports under the EPCG Scheme, initially provisionally assessed at 10%. The dispute arose from subsequent orders imposing the higher duty rate. 2. The appellant argued that despite the EPCG issuance during 1992-97 (when duty was 15%), DGFT notifications in 1997 altered the applicable rate to 10% for goods cleared post-notification issuance. The notifications specifically addressed licenses issued before 31-3-1997, like the appellant's, allowing import under the revised rate post-clearance. 3. The SDR contended that the license indicating 15% obligated customs to apply that rate unless endorsed with the revised rate. However, the Tribunal noted that general notifications in 1997 automatically amended duty rates for covered licenses to 10%, not necessitating individual endorsements. 4. Both Notification Nos. 3/1997-2002 and 6/1997-2002 had a general impact on licenses under the EXIM policy 1992-97, validating continued imports at the revised 10% duty rate post-notification. The Tribunal found the lower authorities erred in denying the reduced rate due to lack of specific endorsement, as the notifications inherently altered duty rates for covered imports. 5. Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding their imports eligible for the 10% assessment as originally done. The duty demand at 15% was deemed legally unjustified, leading to its set aside and allowing the appeal with any consequential relief for the appellants.
|
