9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (1) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. This application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 20,07,049.80 confirming duty and Rs. 6,00,000/- imposed as penalty on the applicants M/s. Anmol Jewellers were argued by Shri D.H. Shah Advocate and Shri K.L. Ramteke appeared for the Revenue. 2. The applicants imported certain machines paying concessional rates of duty in terms of Notification No. 159/86 da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... permitting their redemption on payment of fine. The importers then filed an appeal and also the present application. 3. Ld. Counsel relies heavily upon the specific finding in the judgment in the case of Nathan Jewellers Ors. v. Collector of Customs, Madras [1994 (52) ECR 21 (Tribunal)] and especially the separate judgment recorded by the Member (Technical). It is submitted that the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ras [1995 (80) E.L.T. 407 (Tribunal)] in which a similar sentiment was expressed. 4. Arguing further Shri D.H. Shah claimed that it is not that the goods manufactured on the machines in question were not exported. It is his claim that they were exported by Merchant Manufacturers. He submits that this claim was made before the ld. Commissioner vide the importers letter dated 18-12-1992. It is his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of consideration of the stay application we accept this submission that the judgment becomes of guiding value. We also to find prima facie as far as in the submission that for fulfilling the condition of the notification what is required is that the resultant goods be exported and not that the importer himself must be the exporter. We also take note that in the EPCG licence scheme third party expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
