2008 (5) TMI 222 - AT - Customs

Commissioner has given clear finding that since some of the finished products manufacture did not come up to the standard expected of an export item, they were sold in the domestic tariff area only with the permission of the Development Commissioner therefore, commissioner is justified in setting aside the demand in case of irregularities found in maintenance of accounts, penalty imposed by Commissioner require no interference

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Clearance of finished marble slabs and tiles by a 100% EOU into the domestic tariff area.
2. Interpretation of the permission granted by the Development Commissioner for sale of marble rejects to DTA.
3. Classification of 'sawn marble slabs' as finished items.
4. Admissibility of statements recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act as evidence.
5. Maintenance of accounts and imposition of penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a 100% EOU permitted to manufacture and export granite slabs and tiles, as well as finished marble slabs and tiles. The dispute arose when the Department alleged that the party cleared sawn marble slabs, not finished products, into the domestic tariff area against the permission granted. The Adjudication Order imposed duty, interest, and penalty on the EOU, which was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that the EOU had indeed cleared finished products, not raw materials, into the domestic tariff area. He highlighted the various processes undertaken by the party on the imported marble blocks, including cutting and sawing, to address the defects in the goods. The Commissioner found that the goods cleared were subject to appropriate Central Excise Duty, dropping the duty and interest demands but imposing a penalty for accounting irregularities.

3. The Revenue appealed the Commissioner's decision, arguing that the EOU contravened the permission by clearing unfinished items into DTA. They emphasized the permission granted for DTA clearance of only finished items, not unfinished or semi-finished products. The Revenue also cited a Tribunal judgment to support their claim that 'sawn marble slabs' should not be considered finished items based on the processes involved.

4. The Departmental Representative supported the grounds of appeal, while the Advocate for the party highlighted the detailed findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the processes undertaken by the EOU. The Advocate argued that the goods were not simply rough marbles but underwent significant processes, and the lack of investigation into the recipients of the goods raised doubts about the allegations.

5. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, noting that the EOU had undertaken processes on the imported goods, including pricing adjustments reflecting the cost of conversion. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the Commissioner's conclusions based on the evidence and processes undertaken by the party. Regarding the penalty imposed for accounting irregularities, the Tribunal deemed it reasonable and declined to interfere with the Commissioner's decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the party's cross-objection, upholding the Commissioner's findings on the clearance of finished products and the imposition of a penalty for accounting irregularities.