9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (9) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He has also ordered that in bond manufacturing licence issued under Section 50 65 of the Customs Act is cancelled. The capital goods imported duty free have been held liable to confiscation but have not been confiscated. 2. Heard Shri G. Sampath, Ld. Advocate for appellants and Shri S. Kannan, Ld. DR. 3. Ld. Advocate submits that appellants since during the last 12 years exported specified goods under the 100% EoU scheme totalling to Rs. 5,83,17,456.37/- as per the year-wise statement submitted in this Tribunal today which has been taken on record. Therefore, he submits that it cannot be said that the export obligations have not been met. Secondly, Ld. Advocate submits that vide their order dated 28-10-96, the Govt. of India as the au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the notice of the Customs authorities that the conditions of the Customs duty exemption vide notifications relevant have been violated by a unit, particularly where a 100% EoU ceases the production prematurely or fails to commence production or export within the stipulated period, leading to non-fulfilment of export obligations etc., the Customs authorities should inform the Development Commissioner concerned all the facts of the case and though the Customs can issue show cause notice to safeguard the Revenue, the demand of duty should be confirmed only after a definite conclusion has been arrived at by the Development Commissioner . He submits that this procedure was unfortunately not invoked when the order-in-original impugned was passed, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order needs to be set aside. Ld. Advocate also adds to underscore his above submission that every time the capital goods were received under the said customs duty exemption, the customs officers were deputed to re-inspect the premises and give certification regarding availability of space for installation of the said capital goods in the same premises. He further submits that for a significant period of time, the customs officers were exclusively posted to their unit on cost recovery basis. He submits that in each of these instances not a murmur was recorded as to the suitability of the premises to function as a 100% EoU. He submits that it has been acknowledged in the order that no stock taking was ever conducted in the said unit. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g inbond to appellants, while on the otherhand, the Government extends their 100% EoU status under law which is still in currency. We note that but for the stay granted and periodically extended by the Tribunal as noted above, the export of goods valued at over Rs. 5 Crores would not have been possible by this unit. We also find that the Ministry has since regulated the procedure to be adopted by the Customs authorities in such cases so that such a hiatus between the orders of two authorities, both acting under law, may be avoided. Unfortunately, such a co-ordinating Circular was not available to the Ld. Collector when he passed his order-in-original impugned. This had resulted in this situation noted above. 7. We also find that there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
