9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 482 - AT - Customs100% EOU - non-payment of Customs Duty - 100% cotton comber Noil - violation of conditions/provisions of Notification No. 52/2003-cus dated 31.3.2003 and conditions mentioned in their Letter of Permission (LOP) and the undertaking given by them in their B-17 Bond - Monetary limit involved in the appeal. HELD THAT - In the present set of 11 appeals, 8 appeals from Sr. No. 1 to 8 of the table mentioned in para 1 of this order, can be dismissed under the Litigation Policy as per Circular No. F. No. 390/Misc/163/2010-JC, dated 17.12.2015, which prescribes the monetary limit of ₹ 10 lakhs. In view of the Customs Notification cited above, first 8 Appeals in the table cited above are dismissed under the Litigation Policy without going into the merit of the case. Further, after completion of the hearing, learned AR for the Revenue brought to our notice that the issue which is involved in the present case has been referred to the larger Bench in appeal No. C/85110/2013. He further prayed that the present appeals should be adjourned awaiting the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of M/S. EUROTEX INDUSTRIES EXPORTS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLHAPUR 2020 (9) TMI 448 - CESTAT MUMBAI . Since the issue involved in the present case has already been referred to the larger bench, therefore, we order that three appeals are adjourned and should be listed after the decision of the larger Bench. Thus, 8 appeals namely, Appeal No. C/88586, 88590 and 88592 to 88597/2013 are dismissed under the Litigation Policy dated 17.12.2015 and 3 appeals namely, Appeal No. C/88598, 88599 88603/2013 are adjourned and to be listed after the decision of the larger Bench.
Issues Involved:
11 appeals filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal allowing respondents' appeals, violation of customs duty payment conditions, reference to larger Bench for decision. Analysis: 1. Common Impugned Order and Appeals: The Revenue filed 11 appeals against Order-in-Appeal No. 141 to 151/BPS/MUM/2013, where the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Orders-in-Original. The appeals involved duty and penalty amounts along with specific order dates. 2. Identical Issue in Appeals: Since the issue in all appeals was identical, they were discussed together. The case of Appeal No. C/88586/2013 was recorded for convenience. 3. Violation of Customs Duty Conditions: The respondent, a 100% EOU, imported Cotton Comber Noil without duty payment for manufacturing Absorbent Cotton. Allegations included non-payment of customs duty on cotton waste generated during manufacturing. Show-cause notices were issued, and the original authority confirmed the demand. 4. Revenue's Arguments: The Revenue contended that the impugned order lacked legal sustainability, citing violations of customs duty conditions and provisions. They highlighted the contravention of various notifications and laws by the assessee. 5. Assessee's Defense: The assessee defended the impugned order, citing the CESTAT's decision in a relevant case. They argued against double levy of excise and customs duty on the same transaction, mentioning pending appeals on excise duty. 6. Judicial Review: After hearing both parties and reviewing the submissions and case law, the Tribunal dismissed 8 appeals based on a monetary limit under Litigation Policy. They adjourned 3 appeals pending a decision from a larger Bench on a related issue. 7. Final Decision: The Tribunal dismissed 8 appeals under Litigation Policy and adjourned 3 appeals pending the larger Bench's decision. The pronouncement was made on 25.08.2020.
|
