9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailable to assessee being transferee of advance licence, cannot be called to fulfill condition V(a) of Notification. In view of Larger bench decision affirmed by Apex Court, original licence to satisfy said condition. Commissioner’s decision unsustainable inasmuch as benefit of legal maxim available to assessee therefore impossible for assessee to violate said condition. Impugned order set aside. - C/1345/2002 - A/53/2010-WZB/C-II/CSTB - Dated:- 16-2-2010 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and M. Veeraiyan, Member (T) Shri Akhil Sheerazi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Dr. T. Tiju, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This appeal comes up before us for final disposal, in the light of the deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the export goods under Section 113 of the Customs Act was raised and an allied proposal for imposition of penalty was also made. Against the present appellant, the goods imported by them were proposed to be confiscated under Section 111 of the Act and the party was proposed to be penalised under Section 112 of the Act. The appellant was also asked to pay duty on the imported raw materials on the ground of violation of Condition V of Notification No. 203/92-Cus. In adjudication of the show-cause notices, the learned Commissioner of Customs demanded duty of Rs 16,74,702/- with interest thereon @ 24% p.a. from M/s. Amar Taran Exports and M/s. Hico Enterprises (appellant), who were held to be "jointly and severally liable" to pay the said duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed under Rule 56A or Rule 57A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 in respect of finished goods exported in discharge of export obligation under DEEC Scheme. It appears from the impugned order that the exportation of finished goods was done by M/s. Amar Taran exports, who claimed to be a merchant-exporter. That party contended that, being a merchant-exporter, there was no question of their availing any input stage credit. There is nothing in the Commissioner's order to indicate that any evidence was found of input stage credit having been availed by M/s. Amar Taran Exports or by any supporting manufacturer in relation to the export goods. At any rate, the appellant contended that it was impossible for them to have availed input stage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
