9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be used in the manufacture of Electron Gun/Tubes whereas they used in the manufacture of metal parts of Electron Gun. Therefore, duty was demanded along with the interest and penalty was also proposed. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore in his Order-in-Original No. 23/99, dated 29-10-1999 adjudicated the said show cause notice and confirmed duty demand of Rs. 20,00,837/- and imposed penalty of equivalent amount on the appellants. He also demanded interest on the amount of duty confirmed. 2. S/Shri T. Rajeswara Sastry and M.S. Nagaraja, Advocates appeared for the appellants. Shri Sastry pleaded that the exemption available under Notification No. 13/97-Cus., dated 1-3-1997 up to 28-2-1997 and under Notification No. 25/99-Cus., dated 28-2-1999 for import of raw materials at concessional rate of duty for manufacture of excisable goods was subject to the importer following the procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. According to these Rules, they obtained Registration Certificate from the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise having jurisdiction over the factory of the manufacturer a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner of Central Excise having jurisdiction over his factory shall have jurisdiction to issue notice for recovery of differential duty under Rule 8 of the said Rules. He pleaded that in this case, when Registration Certificate issued under Rule 3 clearly describes the particulars of the imported material and excisable goods manufactured from the imported material as described as "Parts of Electron Guns/Tubes", there is no mis-declaration or wilful mis-statement with reference to the intended use of the imported material. Therefore, the entire demand under Rule 8 of the Customs (IGCDMEG) Rules, 1996 is not sustainable. He also pleaded that the Asstt. Commissioner issued the Registration Certificate and also accepted the Bond on the basis of undertaking that the imported raw material would be used in the manufacture of "Parts of Electron Guns/Tubes". Both the Department and the appellants were under a bona fide understanding that the appellants are eligible for benefit of concessional rate of duty. If subsequently the Department changes its views and holds the appellants are not eligible for exemption, the Department cannot allege that there is a wilful mis-statement on the part of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oy, Cobalt)" whereas in the Registration Certificate, they had described the nature and the description of the excisable goods to be manufactured from the imported goods is "GI Cup/Assy, G4, G5 Cup/Assy Suds/Strap, Spacer, cathode, Eyelets (PARTS FOR ELECTRON GUN/TUBES)". In the Bond before the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, they have described the goods to be manufactured as "METAL PARTS FOR ELECTRON GUN/TUBES" but before the Customs Authority in Annexure-III declaration and Bills of Entry, the goods are described as "Parts for manufacture of Electronic Gun/Tubes". Thus, what is described before the Customs Authority in the Bills of Entry and what is described before the Central Excise Authority are two different things and therefore, the appellants had deliberately described the goods as "Parts for manufacture of Electronic Tubes" is totally a mis-declaration with an intention to evade payment of customs duty. Therefore, suppression of facts is fully established and the intention of the appellants is also quite clear by mis-declaring the goods as "Parts of Electron Gun" and not as raw material for manufacture of Parts of Electron Gun/Tubes. Therefore extended period for d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Gun/Tubes as declared. They have intentionally declared in Annexure-III as "for use in manufacture of Electron Gun/Tubes" in order to avoid any objection on clearance at the port of importation when they were aware that they are not manufacturing any Electron Gun/Tubes. Therefore, they have wilfully mis-stated the use of the said raw material for manufacture of Electron Gun/Tubes while in fact, they have only manufactured Metal Parts of Electron Guns and they were aware that concessional rate of duty under Notification is not available if the goods are imported for use in manufacture of Parts of Electron Guns/Tubes. Thus it is clear that the appellants in Annexure-III which was signed by the Excise Officer and was used for clearance of the goods before the Customs Authority, had shown wrong description of the goods to be manufactured as Electron Guns/Tubes. We find that this issue was examined by the Commissioner in his Order-in-Original wherein he has given his findings in Para 22 which is reproduced below - "22. It is no doubt true that the assessee has declared that they manufacture Metal Parts of electron gun in the Rule 173B Declaration, in the Regn. Certificate issued and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
