9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (5) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had imported capital goods and they were under obligation to export Pig Iron and non-alloy steel products to a value of four times the value of imported goods within a period of five years. On a detailed examination of the contract dated 15-5-1991, it was found that the appellants had not included in the assessable value the design and engineering charges including documentation, product handling, workshop tests and inspections. The details of the values of these charges have already been brought out in the Show Cause Notice. Statements were recorded from Shri M.V.R. Sarma, Deputy General Manager (Exports), who admitted for not having installed the said imported equipment and about non-fulfilment of export obligation. Therefore, the Show Ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pe of manufacture of the imported goods. He also submits that it is the DGFT who has to clarify on this point and the Customs authorities are bound by the said clarification. He relies on the ruling given by the Delhi High Court in the case of ONGC v. CEGAT - 1994 (73) E.L.T. 776 (Del.) wherein there is an observation that the CEGAT should bear in mind that the ONGC is a Public Sector Undertaking of the Government of India and that its property and assets are sufficient security for the duty involved in the appeal. 5. Learned SDR pointed out to the various findings given by the Commissioner with regard to the suppression of facts and non-fulfilment of the terms of the Notification. He also pointed out that the goods had not been erect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t jurisdiction to initiate proceedings for non-fulfilment of the terms of notification and also to arrive at the correct assessable value. However, taking into consideration the plea that the appellant has incurred huge losses, we direct the appellants to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only) within a period of four months from today. On such deposits being made, the balance of duties and penalty is waived and recovery stayed. It is made clear that if the amounts are not deposited, then the appeal will be liable for dismissal under Section 129E of the Act. Call on report of compliance on 20th September, 2004. On such compliance, the appeal would be taken up for final hearing on 8th October, 2004. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
