2006 (5) TMI 38 - AT - Customs

Customs - Demand- Supervision/Establishment charges - Alleged that establishment charges are to be paid in respect of staff members that were posted - No evidence in support of evidence - So that Tribunal and Hon ble High Court decision in favour of Appellant

Summary

Issues: Liability to pay supervision charges in respect of in-bond manufacturing facility.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs, holding the appellants liable to pay supervision charges for their in-bond manufacturing facility. The appellant, a 100% Export Oriented Unit, argued that no custom officer was posted at the warehouse, and supervision charges were demanded based on assigning monitoring duties to the Range Officer. The appellant cited the Customs (Fees for Rendering Services by Customs Officer) Regulation, 1998 and referred to legal precedents to support their contention that charges should be paid only on an hourly basis when no full-time staff is posted. The Revenue contended that as per the permission letter, the appellant was liable to pay establishment charges since monitoring duties were assigned to the Range officer. The Tribunal considered the establishment charges demanded from the appellants and the absence of evidence of any officer or staff being posted at their unit. Relying on legal precedents, including the decision of the Tribunal and the High Court, the impugned order demanding supervision charges was deemed unsustainable and set aside. The appeal was allowed, granting the appellants consequential relief as per the law.