9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the applicant. 2. The applicant is engaged in the manufacture of instrument cooling fans. The applicant was issued an EPCG Licence No.P/CG/2133445 dated 6-9-1994 for CIF value of Rs. 26,81,750/- with export obligation of US $ 3,40,000/- which was to be completed within a period of 5 years from the date of issue of the licence. The applicant was thus entitled to import capital goods under concessional rate of duty at 15% under Customs Notification No. 160/92-Cus., dated 20-4-1992. The applicant had executed a Legal Undertaking (LUT) for the same with the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) with the condition that in the event of default in meeting the export obligation it will pay interest @ 24% on the duty saved from the date of f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,96,000/-. Therefore the unfulled export obligation out of US $ 2,96,000/- is US $ 1,22,054/-. Consequently, the amount of Customs duty due on a pro rata basis would work out to Rs. 2,16,610/- as admitted by the applicant. He further submitted that the DGFT vide its letter F. No. 20/696/94/EOC.IIEPGC.IV dated 10-12-1998 had released the Bank Guarantee No. 5616 dated 11-11-1994 for Rs. 3,01,700/- as the applicant had fulfilled 50% of its export obligation. The ld. C.A., finally submitted that the applicant fulfils all the conditions laid down for admission of the case and pleaded for admission of the application. 6. The Revenue was represented by Shri P.K. Agarwal, Appraising Officer from office of the Commissioner of Customs (EP), New Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Act and that DGFT will be at liberty to take a decision regarding levy/waiver of interest under Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. It will suffice to say here that the question of jurisdiction stands settled vide the following decisions holding that the Settlement Commission has jurisdiction in such cases :- (i) Re : Bell Granito Ceramica Ltd. reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 495 (Sett. Comm.) (ii) Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. v. U.O.I. Reported in 2004 (165) E.L.T. 499 (Guj.) (S.L.P. filed against this order has been dismissed by Supreme Court on merits as well as on time-bar). We find that the applicant fulfils all the conditions for admission of the case as laid down in Section 127B of the Act. Hence t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time the Revenue has brought to the notice of this Bench that the department has filed any petition, appeal or review petition as the case may be in any of the aforesaid cases or such cases decided by the Bench. In these circumstances the issue as to the jurisdiction of the Commission with regard to the aforesaid cases stands settled. The Bench therefore feels that the aforesaid Circular dated 20-8-2002 reiterated in Circular No. 11/2003-Cus., dated 25-2-2003 of the Board, despite reference made to the Settlement Commission s decision in M/s. Bell Granito Ceramics Ltd., Mumbai needs to be reviewed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs and suitable instructions issued to its field formations. 10. The Secretariat is directed to endorse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
