9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (5) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ances totalled 1121 crates of the goods under GP2 gate passes and AR4A forms prescribed for the purposes dated 5-9-1983, 19-9-1983, 23-9-1983 and 4-10-1983. However, in December, 1987 the department came to know that these consignments had not in fact been exported but instead had been diverted to the Nadiad Mercantile Co-operative Bank against which the Appellants had obtained loan of Rs. 40 lakhs. The officers found 972 crates in the Bank s godown during the investigation in December, 1987. Various statements were recorded from the Bank Manager, the Director and the Assistant Chief Executive of the appellants as well as sales clerk and their excise clerk which confirmed the position that the goods cleared under AR4 s and GP2 s in 1983 had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . CCE - 1989 (44) E.L.T. 669 (Tribunal) = 1989 (25) ECR 424 (CEGAT WRB). The Collector has observed in this case that the clearance of the goods duty free purportedly for export under Rule 13 and its diversion to the Bank for obtaining loan was pre-planned. It is also noted that the appellants clerk (sales) in his statement in January 1988 had said that he was receiving copies of confirmed order and letters of credit for export goods but in this particular case of export to Singapore he did not receive any such documents. He further stated that no entries were made in despatch register as he was not having particulars of orders L/c etc. and as he did not receive AR4A s no entries were posted in export despatch register. Further it is also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods to the satisfaction of the Collector. There is no explicit provision or any implicit meaning in proviso (c) which could authorize waiving of the duty. It is also to be noted that after the goods are cleared form the factory apparently for export they cease to be under the control of the department and it is left to the assessee to furnish the proof of export. The control over the factory cannot be extended to the control on the goods which have been permitted clearance without payment of duty for the purposes of export. Therefore, in a case where the exporter has failed to export the goods, he cannot claim waiver of duty. Therefore in terms of Rule 14A the demand for duty is correct and proviso (c) cannot be interpreted to mean that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
