9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 1256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 53.00 (Rupees one crore eighteen lakhs eighteen thousand fifty-three) under EPCG Licence; claiming benefit of Notification No. 110/95. This Notification carried a condition that the importer undertakes to export the goods of the value of the Licence within five years of the date of importation. In the instant case, because of labour trouble, the factory was under lock-out and the matter was referred to DGFT for guidance. In the meantime, before completion of five years, the appellants paid the differential duty. However, the authorities below issued a show cause notice asking them to pay the differential duty and also asking them to explain as to why the imported goods should not be confiscated and why a penalty should not be imposed. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provides for penalty upon the importer or any other person for his acts or omissions in respect of the goods which are liable to confiscation under Section 111; that the provisions of Section 112 cannot be invoked unless same goods are first held liable to confiscation under Section 111, the converse does not follow. Learned Senior Counsel also referred to the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Suncity Synthetics Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva reported in 2001 (132) E.L.T. 684 (Tri. - Mumbai), in which this Tribunal held that Notification No. 110/95-Cus., dated 5-6-1995 provides that duty and interest having been paid on failure to fulfil export obligation, no breach of the condition of notification ibid, arises. 6. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty was payable and since the goods of equal value were not exported, therefore, the goods became liable to confiscation. He, therefore, submitted that the Order of the authorities below regarding confiscation of goods and demand of interest, is correct. He reiterated the findings of the authorities below. 9. We have heard the rival submissions. 9.1 On careful consideration of the submissions made and the evidence on record and perusal of the case law cited and relied upon by the appellants, we find that the appellants had claimed a concessional rate of duty under a particular notification. In that notification, there was a condition that the importer shall have to export the goods of equal value within five years of importation, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
