2015 (3) TMI 731 - HC - Customs

Exemption from customs duty for goods imported to India for the purpose of carrying out job work in India and for export of the job worked (finished) product - respondent had found that in certain cases, the petitioner had exported the finished goods after six months and thereby, it is liable to pay interest for the delayed period as stipulated in the Notification - non-submission of documents relating to imports made under the notification - Held that - Though the petitioner contended that almost all the documents were already furnished to the authorities, but it was denied by the respondents and created alert and therefore, this is a disputed question of fact, which this Court is refrained to deal with the same and it is for the petitioner prove the same before the authorities. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances narrated above, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case since the petitioner has been directed to submit the documents, which were admittedly pertaining to the period more than a decade ago, the difficulty expressed by the petitioner in retrieving the documents, appears reasonable and considering the same, this Court is of the view that the impugned order shall be set aside for the present and the petitioner is directed to produce all the relevant documents which were sought for by the respondents, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order regarding alert in EDI system for pending Jobbing Bonds under Customs Notification No.32/97 for exemption from customs duty for job work and export of finished products. Violation of principles of natural justice. Dispute over submission of documents for exports made beyond six months under Notification No.32/97.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged an order issued by the first respondent directing submission of documents due to an alert in the EDI system regarding pending Jobbing Bonds under Customs Notification No.32/97. The petitioner, engaged in manufacturing fuses and fuse components, imported goods for job work claiming exemption for the period 2000 to 2004. The petitioner fulfilled conditions, obtained end-use certificates, and exported finished goods within stipulated periods, seeking extensions when necessary. Despite compliance, alerts were repeatedly issued, hindering exports and imports through Chennai Port.

2. The respondents alleged that certain exports were made beyond the six-month period specified in Notification No.32/97, leading to a demand for interest for delayed periods. The petitioner claimed to have obtained permission for such delayed exports from the Assistant Commissioner. However, the petitioner failed to produce requested documents, resulting in the creation of alerts. The first respondent later granted permission for importation subject to producing relevant documents and paying due duty and interest for exports made beyond the stipulated period.

3. The petitioner contended that most documents were already submitted, but the respondents disputed this claim and maintained the alert. The court refrained from delving into disputed facts but acknowledged the difficulty in retrieving decade-old documents. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order, directing the petitioner to produce all relevant documents within one month to establish the claim for removal of the alert. Failure to comply within the stipulated period would allow the respondents to reinstate the alert.

In conclusion, the court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to lift the alert for one month, during which the petitioner must submit all necessary documents. Failure to do so within the specified timeframe would result in the reinstatement of the alert.