9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 449X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appropriate rate and a penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs has been imposed. Besides, the redemption fine of Rs. 50 lakhs was imposed on the goods, which were held liable for confiscation, but were not available for confiscation. 2. The stay application is being heard afresh in terms of the directions of the Hon ble High Court passed on the writ petition filed by the applicant against the earlier stay order directing the appellants to deposit a part amount. 3. The issue relates to the determination of applicable rate of excise duty in respect of goods cleared by a 100% EOU to DTA against valid permission for sale to DTA. It is pleaded that the DTA clearance is covered by the permission granted for DTA sale. 4. We have heard both sides. 5. We n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e out of the raw materials i.e. ore and coke, coal etc. supplied by the TISCO in free of cost. The order holds that the activity is a job work. On referring to Para 9.17 of the Exim Policy, the order proceeds to hold that, the EOU are permitted to undertake job work of the DTA unit for export, with the permission of the Assistant Commissioner, provided the goods are exported directly from EOU unit - which is allegedly violated in this case. The other objection is that the permission to sale a product to DTA unit, does not cover the clearance of products to the DTA, which are manufactured through a job work. Though these issues are debatable, the appellants are pleading that, they have a strong prima facie case on merits and therefore their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied by TISCO, the contents of Para 9.17 of the policy do not have anything to do in this case. 9. Therefore, in a situation of this nature, the manufacture of finished goods, even if for the sake of arguments is considered to be through a job work arrangements, does not make the manufacture of the finished goods different from being the goods manufactured by a 100% EOU. In the face of specific permission granted to the appellants to make a DTA sale and in the absence of any allegation that the quantum is not covered by the said permission, the denial of concessional duty applicable to such permissible DTA sale prima facie is not supported by law. We are unable to see any ineligibility applicable to goods manufactured on job work basis in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
