9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 836 - AT - CustomsDemand of duty foregone on the capital goods imported by the appellant - obtaining nine EPCG Authorizations for import of capital goods - failure to fulfil the export obligations - HELD THAT - It is seen that the adjudicating authority has confirmed the duty demand in respect of 8 Licences only for the reason that the appellant has not furnished the EODC. However, to establish that the appellant has fulfilled their export obligations, the Ld. Counsel has furnished all the EODCs (in respect of 8 Licences) - this is a fit case to remand to the adjudicating authority, who shall verify the EODCs furnished by the appellant and re-consider the matter afresh. Further, the appellant shall also be given reasonable opportunity of personal hearing and to furnish evidence. The matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority, who is directed to examine the EODCs furnished by the appellant and pass a speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of this order. The impugned order is set aside - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
The judgment deals with the demand of duty, interest, and penalty imposed on the appellant for not producing Export Obligation Discharge Certificates (EODCs) to establish fulfillment of export obligations as required under nine EPCG Authorizations. Summary: Issue 1: Import of Capital Goods under EPCG Authorizations The appellant imported capital goods under nine EPCG Authorizations, with conditions to fulfill export obligations and execute necessary bonds. However, after the license period expired, the appellant failed to produce EODCs to prove export obligation fulfillment. Issue 2: Show Cause Notice and Order-in-Original A Show Cause Notice was issued proposing duty recovery, interest, and penalties due to the appellant's failure to provide EODCs. The original authority confirmed the demand through Order-in-Original, leading to the appellant's appeal before the Tribunal. Issue 3: Arguments and Submissions The appellant's counsel argued that due to reasons beyond their control, they couldn't produce EODCs despite fulfilling export obligations. They expressed readiness to furnish EODCs to establish compliance. The Department's representative supported the original order findings. Issue 4: Tribunal Decision After hearing both parties, the Tribunal considered the matter. They noted that the appellant had submitted EODCs for eight out of the nine licenses. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for verification of the EODCs provided by the appellant and a fresh consideration. The appellant was granted a personal hearing and the opportunity to present evidence. Conclusion The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to furnish EODCs, setting aside the original order. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for reevaluation based on the EODCs submitted. The adjudicating authority was directed to issue a new decision within three months. The appeal was allowed for remand. This summary captures the key issues, arguments, and the Tribunal's decision in the legal judgment regarding the demand of duty, interest, and penalty related to EPCG Authorizations and the requirement of Export Obligation Discharge Certificates.
|
