9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9-2-81 and started their operations. As the appellant experienced certain difficulties in fulfilling their export obligation, they approached the Govt. of India for withdrawal from the EOU scheme and to permit them to sell the goods locally after completion of the debonding formalities. The Govt. of India accepted their request for debonding subject to the condition that the export obligation should be completed in the course of five year i.e. up to the end of 1991. They also permitted the appellant to export only 30% of their annual production and the balance of 70% for domestic consumption. The appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court of A.P. on 6-1-87, and the High Court directed the Customs Authorities to allow clearances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest. The above order of the Collector (Appeals) dared 6-1-95 was challenged by the Department in the CEGAT. In the mean time, the Assistant Commissioner passed the de novo OIO dated 14-3-1997, finalising the assessment on the imported goods. In the said order, the Assistant Commissioner took the date of debonding as 31-12-93 which is actually the date of completion of export obligation by the appellant, and on this basis demanded customs duty of Rs. 1,63,11,254/- and an amount of Rs. 2,22,69,102/- towards interest. He further directed that the amount of Rs. 2.10 crores paid by the appellant be adjusted against the duty and interest payable and accordingly demanded balance interest of Rs. 1,75,80,356/-. The appellants filed an appeal aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the authorities and interest has been calculated till this date even though by 31-10-1991, they had already paid total amount of Rs. 2.10 crores, in terms of A.P. High Court s Order in the writ petition filed by them. In terms of the High Court s Order, the amount paid by the appellant on various dates is as follows : Date Amount in Lakhs 30-12-1986 Rs. 50 lakhs 31-3-1987 Rs. 25 lakhs 30-6-1987 Rs. 25 lakhs 30-9-1987 Rs. 25 lakhs 27-6-1988 Rs. 25 lakhs 14-10-1988 Rs. 25 lakhs 15-10-1988 Rs. 25 lakhs 31-10-1991 Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 210 lakhs The learned Counsel took us through the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. All these indicate that what has been paid in various instalments as permitted by the Govt. and also as directed by the Hon ble High Court is only duty and the same should not be considered as deposit. When the duty has been paid well before the determination of the duty by the Assistant Commissioner, no question of payment of interest arises. The appellant contended that the interest payable as per Section 61 amounts to only to Rs. 44,83,677/-. They had submitted a very detailed worksheet in this connection. 5. The learned JCDR supported the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). 6. We have considered the rival submissions. The capital goods are imported free of customs duty under Notification 13/81. The appellant is given this faci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me is set aside. It is against commonsense to charge interest after the duty liability has been discharged. The interest liability is to be calculated directly in accordance with Section 61(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 for the relevant period. Hence, we remand the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) for redetermination of the liability to interest in terms of Section 61(2) of the Customs Act after observing the principles of natural justice. While calculating the interest liability, the duty paid in instalments at different times well before the AC s Order dated 14-3-97 has to be taken into account. The interest so determined should be adjusted against the amount already deposited by the appellant. With these observations, we remand the matte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
