9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 781X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants were unable to clear the goods from the warehouse on payment of licence duty due to lack of actual user buyer. They contacted their collaborators and requested them to take back the machinery and they want to re-export the goods. Since the policy was again changed to permit 10 years old goods under OGL, there were some difficulties in the collaborators accepting the goods back. The bond period in the meantime had expired on 25-9-99, and Dy. Commissioner by order dated 11-11-2000, confirmed the payment of Rs. 21,06,229/- along with interest thereon under Section 61(2) and imposed a penalty of Rs. 7,000/- in terms of Apex Court decision in the case of Kesoram Industries v. Commissioner of Customs, reported in 1996 (96) ECR 201 (S.C.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xercised, only after the expiration of the period, during which such goods are permitted to remain in the Warehouse under Section 61. Section 61, permits extension of time, for retaining the goods in the Warehouse, which can be granted by the Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner. Therefore, while the law permits the issue of a demand, casting liability on the owner to pay, such demands, cannot be enforced, till the extension period of time, if granted, under Section 6 is operative. The full amount of duty under Section 72(1)(6) can be determined, only on the date of expiry of the extension period as granted. In the present case, extension applications have been made, and are pending. The Dy. Commissioner therefore should have proceeded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 428 (T)] of this Bench is not found to be applicable in the facts of this case. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the duty demands being made. 3. During the hearing, the ld. Adv strongly urged that permission to re-export the goods may be granted. There is no objection under the law to re-export the goods which are imported, however, the duty due on the imported goods which are re-exported has to be claimed as drawback under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 which prescribe that 98% of such duty shall be repaid as drawback. We, therefore, find no objection in allowing the re-export of the goods on payment of duty under claim of drawback as admissible under the law. 4. The appeal is therefore decided and disposed of in terms of our fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
