9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 498 - AT - CustomsViolation of import conditions - failure to produce the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) - Advance Authorization scheme - duty free import of 20,000 kgs of Light Black Pepper - HELD THAT - The impugned order was passed only on account of non-submission of the EODC certificate. The said EODC certificate has now been produced before me by the appellant which certifies that the appellant has fulfilled the export obligation as required under the Advance Authorization dated 25.09.2009 issued by the JDGFT. In view of the EODC certificate produced by the appellant certifying the fulfillment of export obligation, the impugned order is not sustainable in law - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Appeal against rejection of appeal by Commissioner (Appeals) for failure to produce Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) in a case involving duty free import of Light Black Pepper under Advance Authorization. Analysis: The case involved an appeal against the rejection of the appellant's appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to the failure to produce the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC). The appellant held an Advance Authorization for duty-free import of Light Black Pepper and was obligated to export Black Pepper Oil and Black Pepper Oleoresins within a specified period. The appellant cleared the imported goods but failed to produce the EODC, resulting in a demand for duty payment. The appellant argued that they fulfilled the export obligation as per the Authorization, but could not produce the EODC earlier due to non-receipt from DGFT. Subsequently, the EODC was obtained and presented, confirming the fulfillment of export obligation. Upon hearing both parties and examining the records, the Judicial Member found that the impugned order was based solely on the absence of the EODC certificate. With the EODC now available and certifying compliance with the export obligation, the Judicial Member concluded that the rejection of the appeal was not legally sustainable. Consequently, the Judicial Member set aside the impugned order and allowed the appellant's appeal. The decision was pronounced in Open Court on 08/08/2019.
|
