9911796707
|
Home
The appellate tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, under the citation 2009 (7) TMI 994, heard the case of Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram and Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, JJ. The appellant, represented by Shri B.V. Kumar, Advocate, applied for waiver of pre-deposit of differential duty of Customs of Rs. 2,86,80,223 along with interest, and penalty equal to duty imposed on M/s. Regency Ceramics Ltd. (RCL) and a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on M/s. Regency Glazes Ltd. (RGL). The demand confirmation arose from the denial of the benefit of concessional rate of duty on capital goods imported by RCL against an EPCG license, due to the goods being found installed in the factory premises of RGL instead of RCL, contravening the notification conditions.
The tribunal noted that RCL had fulfilled its export obligation and had initially installed the imported goods in their premises, certified by the jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner. The goods were subsequently shifted to RGL, a group company, without intimation to the relevant authorities. The tribunal considered this a procedural lapse, as the shifting was not explicitly forbidden by the notification, and the Handbook of Procedures 2002-07 allowed for such transfers with proper intimation. As RCL had fulfilled its obligations, the tribunal found the duty demand and penalty not sustainable, waiving the pre-deposit and staying recovery pending appeals. The operative part of the order was pronounced on 23-7-2009.
|
