9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ABAL scheme, wherein they exported materials prior to importation of the raw materials by quoting the DEEC licence number on shipping bills. They obtained advance licences as per the Exim Policy during the period 1992-93, 93-94 and 94-95. They fulfilled export obligations against each such licence before the raw materials were imported. Out of the licences obtained, they got 19 licences transferred to M/s. Tirumala Rerolling Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad with the concurrence of the Jt. DGFT, Hyderabad and on 3 licences they imported 59 MT of PVC for their own use. 2. It was learnt by them that the facility of transferring the advance licences was not available, since Modvat credit on indigenous raw material used in the product exported was avai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 283/- (Rs. 31,46,881/- in PLA and Rs. 2,47,402/- in RG 23A). As regards the credit availed on raw materials included in two licences whose transferability was not applied by them, credits were not required to be reversed. As regards the 19 licences, transfer entries in favour of M/s. Tirumal Rerolling Pvt. Ltd. were got cancelled since they had some more export order negotiating import of raw materials. They used these partly utilised licences for their own imports by getting the licences re-transferred from Jt. DGFT; an amount of Rs. 2,57,945/- on two licences was excess debit, they requested permission for the credit of the same. As regards penalty; for violation of Notification No. 204/92-Cus., dated 19-5-1992 they submitted that the Gov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility for penalty under Rule 173Q(1)(bb) in availing and utilizing the credits. (b) We also find that the Commissioner has come to a finding that contravention of Rule 9(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 has been proved. We cannot find how a provision of Rule 9(1) has been arrived at, since that rule stipulates the time and payment of duty and penalty can be imposed only under Rule 9(2) up to Rs. 2000/- could only be imposed for violation of Rule 9(1). This order has been passed only to cause and to confirm a penalty, when no such penalty is called for since there is no clandestine removal of excisable goods alleged or determined. Therefore no penalty under Central Excise Rules, 1944 is called for. (c) When the credit suo m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
