9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against duty demand, interpretation of "deemed importer," liability of exporter in duty payment.
Summary: 1. The appeal was filed against a duty demand of approximately Rs. 7.22 lakhs by the Commissioner. The appellant, K. Sons Overseas, exported industrial belts after obtaining advance licenses, which were transferred to another company, S.G. Chemicals, for importing synthetic rubber duty-free under Notification 203/90. 2. The Commissioner alleged that Modvat credit was utilized in manufacturing the exported goods, contravening the notification conditions. Notices were issued to S.G. Chemicals and the appellant for duty recovery. 3. The Commissioner found K. Sons Overseas liable as a "deemed importer" under the DEEC Scheme for not responding to the show cause notice. However, the Tribunal disagreed, stating that the importer, S.G. Chemicals, should bear duty liability, not the exporter. 4. The Tribunal referred to a previous order regarding the concept of "deemed importer," emphasizing that duty recovery is from the person chargeable with duty, i.e., the importer in the case of import duty. The appellant, as an exporter, cannot be considered the importer. 5. No misstatements were found in the shipping bills filed by the appellant. The Tribunal held that the duty liability falls on the importer, S.G. Chemicals, and not the exporter. The Commissioner's conclusion to penalize the importer for misstatements was deemed unfounded. 6. The appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner's order demanding duty from the exporter was set aside. Separate Judgment: None.
|
