2011 (1) TMI 93 - AT - Customs

Waiver of pre-deposit - iron an steel were imported by the appellants at concessional rate of duty - condition attached to the said notification requires production of end-use certificate from the Assistant Commissioner within a period of six months - Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the benefit of Notification cannot be denied on the ground of non-submission of end-use certificates within a period of six months, when there is no denial of the fact that the assessees had never eventually produced the end-use certificate issued by the proper office assesee s grievance is that the issue was not the subject matter of show cause notice, while the Commissioner (Appeals) before confirming the duty on the ground has not given any opportunity to clarify the issue - order set aside and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority

Summary

Issues:

1. Denial of benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No.21/2002-Cus due to non-submission of end-use certificates within the specified period.
2. Confirmation of demand of duty based on incomplete end-use certificates.
3. Lack of opportunity to clarify the issue before confirming the duty based on incomplete end-use certificates.

Analysis:

1. The case involved the denial of the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No.21/2002-Cus to the assessee for not submitting end-use certificates within the stipulated period. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the duty along with interest due to non-compliance with the notification's condition.

2. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged that the benefit of the notification should not be denied solely based on the non-submission of end-use certificates within the specified time frame. However, he confirmed the demand of duty on the grounds that some of the end-use certificates did not cover the entire quantities imported by the assessee.

3. The assessee contended that the issue of incomplete end-use certificates was not part of the show cause notice, and they were not given an opportunity to address this issue before the duty was confirmed. The appellate tribunal recognized the legal aspect in favor of the assessee but decided to remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for verification of the production or non-production of end-use certificates for the disputed quantity.

4. Consequently, the appellate tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the original adjudicating authority to verify the facts regarding the end-use certificates. The assessee was granted an opportunity to contest the issue of incomplete end-use certificates. The appeals and stay petitions were disposed of accordingly, emphasizing the importance of verifying factual aspects before confirming demands based on incomplete documentation.