2009 (4) TMI 770 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Requirement of pre-deposit amounts under Customs Act and Central Excise Act.
2. Allegations of willful evasion of duty and non-compliance with export obligations.
3. Contention regarding permission from Development Commissioner for clearances.
4. Interpretation of Final Exit order and compliance with export performance norms.
5. Consideration of relevant facts and principles of Natural Justice in the adjudication process.

Issue 1: Requirement of pre-deposit amounts under Customs Act and Central Excise Act

The appellants were required to pre-deposit significant amounts, including customs duty, excise duty, penalties, and interest under the Customs Act and the Central Excise Act. The total sum demanded was substantial, and the Adjudicating authority confirmed the duty, interest, and penalties, leading to the need for pre-deposit as per the impugned order.

Issue 2: Allegations of willful evasion of duty and non-compliance with export obligations

The Revenue alleged that the appellants willfully cleared and sold shrimp feed in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) without proper permissions, leading to duty evasion and non-fulfillment of export obligations. The Revenue invoked the extended period under the Customs Act and issued show cause notices for recovery of excise duty on indigenous raw materials procured without duty payment, along with proposing penal actions.

Issue 3: Contention regarding permission from Development Commissioner for clearances

The appellants argued that they had obtained permission from the Development Commissioner for clearing shrimp feed in the DTA against foreign exchange payments as per the Exim Policy. They presented letters from the Development Commissioner to support their claim, indicating that the show cause notice and Adjudication order were incorrect in alleging non-compliance with permissions.

Issue 4: Interpretation of Final Exit order and compliance with export performance norms

The appellants contested the Revenue's interpretation of the Board of Approvals' decision regarding the EOU status of their unit. They referred to the Final Exit order by the Development Commissioner, which acknowledged the unit's positive export performance and fulfillment of export obligations, leading to the grant of Final Exit from the EOU Scheme under the Exim Policy.

Issue 5: Consideration of relevant facts and principles of Natural Justice in the adjudication process

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellants. They noted that the appellants had obtained permission, paid Excise duty, and received a Final Exit order from the Development Commissioner. The Tribunal observed that the Adjudicating authority had not considered crucial facts and that the alleged decision of the Board of Approval was not part of the show cause notice, violating principles of Natural Justice. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered a full waiver of the pre-deposit of all dues until the appeal's disposal, allowing stay applications and listing the matter for further hearing.

This detailed analysis covers the key issues addressed in the judgment, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings and decisions made by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE.