9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 192 - AT - Central ExciseQuantum of Bank Guarantee - amount of bank guarantee reduced to 5% - financial hardship - provisional release of goods on furnishing of B-11 bond - Is the reduction in the amount of Bank Guarantee justified? - Held that - it is only a typographical discrepancy. The decision in the case of CC & Ors. Vs. M/s Navshakti Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. 2011 (5) TMI 149-Supreme Court and CESTAT referred, where it was held that the bank guarantee amount deserves to be reduced to 5% of the value of the goods as at the time of release of goods in any case the assessee has to pay full amount of duty - provisional release of goods ordered with modification that the bank guarantee of 5% of the value of the goods only to be furnished - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
Financial hardship due to provisional release order and bank guarantee amount reduction. Analysis: The appellant pleaded financial hardship due to the terms in the provisional release order issued by the Principal Commissioner, requiring a substantial bank guarantee. They cited legal precedents to support their plea, including a decision by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and a CESTAT Hyderabad decision. The appellant expressed inability to honor the bank guarantee amount specified in the order. The Assistant Commissioner objected to the reduction of the bank guarantee amount, highlighting a discrepancy in the appeal and the amount deposited by the assessee as evidenced by the submitted challans. After reviewing the facts, the judge found the discrepancy to be typographical and agreed with the appellant's argument that the bank guarantee amount should be reduced to 5% of the value of the goods. The judgment emphasized that regardless of the bank guarantee reduction, the assessee would still be liable to pay the full duty amount. As a result, the goods were ordered to be released in accordance with the Principal Commissioner's order, with the modification that a bank guarantee of 5% of the goods' value should be furnished. A miscellaneous application for early hearing was allowed, and the appeal was disposed of based on the above terms. The order was to be given Dasti, indicating that a copy would be provided immediately.
|
