Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2024 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (11) TMI 65 - AT - Customs


Issues:
Whether a 100% EOU is liable to pay customs duty for raw material consumed in excess of SION norms due to improper accounting.

Analysis:
The appeals revolved around the liability of a 100% EOU to pay customs duty for raw material consumed in excess of SION norms. The appellant had imported 'Milled Glass Powder' for manufacturing 'Bead glass' used in 'Electron Guns'. The issue arose when the waste generated during production exceeded the permissible 4.76% wastage under SION norms. The Adjudicating authority confirmed duty and interest under Section 72(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 for the period from August 2004 to March 2006.

The appellant contended that they had sought approval from the Development Commissioner to amend the wastage norms, which was granted on an ad hoc basis. The Board of Approvals for 100% EOU also decided to continue the ad hoc norms until regular norms were approved. The appellant argued that the excess wastage was still available with the EOU and cited Circulars clarifying the allowance of self-declared norms in such cases.

The appellant challenged the jurisdiction of the Adjudication authority, citing Circulars that required concurrence of the Development Commissioner before concluding demands. They argued that the Development Commissioner's approval of excess wastage should prevent duty demands. Additionally, they highlighted that Section 72 of the Customs Act pertains to goods improperly removed from the warehouse, which was not the case here.

The appellant also relied on precedents and judgments to support their arguments, emphasizing that the demand of customs duty on raw materials imported and consumed in excess of SION norms was contradictory to the law. They pointed out that the Board of Approval's approval of wastage norms should have been binding on the Customs authority, preventing the rejection of ad hoc norms.

The Tribunal, after considering the facts and arguments presented, concluded that the mere excess of wastage over SION norms does not automatically imply improper use of imported goods. If export obligations were fulfilled, and the excess waste was still available in the EOU, the demand for duty under Sections 65(2)(b) and 72(1)(d) was deemed unjustified. Therefore, the appeals were allowed, and the recovery of duty and interest was set aside.

In summary, the judgment emphasized the importance of fulfilling export obligations and the relevance of approvals granted by competent authorities in determining the liability of a 100% EOU to pay customs duty for excess wastage beyond SION norms.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates