2007 (2) TMI 443 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Alleged violation of terms of Notification No. 2/95 regarding concessional rate of duty.
2. Requirement of pre-deposit duty amount of Rs. 47,94,815.
3. Contention regarding achievement of minimum NFEP prescribed in policy.
4. Challenge to Commissioner's order based on Development Commissioner's decision.
5. Tribunal's consideration of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. case and relevant judgments.

Analysis:

Issue 1: The Department alleged that the appellants violated the terms of Notification No. 2/95 by not adhering to the minimum NFEP prescribed in the policy. The appellant contended that they achieved exports of Rs. 12.33 Crores, which was acknowledged by the Development Commissioner, leading to the dropping of proceedings.

Issue 2: The appellant was required to pre-deposit a duty amount of Rs. 47,94,815. The learned Counsel argued for a total waiver of the pre-deposit, citing the Development Commissioner's decision and reliance on previous judgments like Kaatyayini Exports v. CCE, Mumbai.

Issue 3: The Development Commissioner's decision played a crucial role in the case. The Tribunal noted that once the competent authority grants permission for DTA clearance and drops proceedings, Central Excise authorities cannot question the validity of such permission. This principle was upheld in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Surat-I.

Issue 4: The learned DR submitted that the demands were rightly confirmed, but the Tribunal found that the Development Commissioner had dropped proceedings against the appellants, leading to a favorable consideration for the appellants regarding the waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

Issue 5: Considering the precedents set by the Tribunal and the Apex Court, the Tribunal held that the appellants were eligible for a waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery due to the Development Commissioner's decision and the principles established in relevant judgments. The matter was scheduled for an out-of-turn hearing based on the involvement of a substantial amount exceeding Rs. 47 lakhs.