9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Applicant a Public Ltd. Company had obtained an Advance Licence No. 08000097 dated 28-8-97 under DEEC Scheme for import of 257.5 MTs of Polyester Chips and 2.5 MTs of Spin Finish Oil. Applicant had cleared these goods under Release Advice No. 170/AHD-MUM/47-97/98 dated 7-9-98 after executing a Bond supported by Bank Guarantee of total amount of Rs. 19,30,000/- in terms of the condition of the licence and DEEC Book No. 219125. The applicant had to fulfil an export obligation of 250 MTs. of POY. However the applicant could not fulfil the export obligation fully. 3. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the applicant demanding duty of Rs. 24,05,470/- on excess import of Polyester Chips of 212.386 mts. along with interest @ 24% upto 31-7-2000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Shri Paresh M. Dave, Advocate and Shri P.C. Pandey, Director. 9. The ld. Advocate submitted that the applicants during the course of the admission hearing had admitted only the duty liability of Rs. 24,05,470/- as against the demand by the Revenue in their Show Cause Notice for Rs. 35,01,573/- [i.e. Rs. 24,05,470/- + Rs. 10,96,103/- (interest)]. However, it was submitted that the applicants are ready and willing to admit the entire demand of the Revenue vide their Show Cause Notice for Rs. 35,01,573/- and prayed for grant of immunities. 10. The Revenue was represented by Shri Pratul Tiwary, Appraiser of Customs, Ahmedabad. 11. The ld. Representative of the Revenue submitted a written submission dated 27-9-2002 and drew the attention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urview of the Settlement Commission. 14. The following aspects were examined by the Commission while allowing the application of M/s. Bell Granito Ceramica Ltd. to be proceeded with : (1) Objects in setting up of Settlement Commission. (2) Interpretation of provisions under Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962. (3) Judicial pronouncements already available in relation to laws of Settlement Commission in the Income-tax Act as amended from time to time as the laws of settlement for both are para materia. (4) Ratio of case laws on levy, collection and assessment of duty of Customs as decided by Tribunal, Hon ble Supreme Court etc. from time to time. 15. The basic object of Settlement Commission in Income-tax side h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Settlement Commission has been approved by the highest Court of the land in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras v. Express Newspapers Ltd. [(1994) 2 Supreme Court Cases 374]. 17. The Commission has also examined in detail the provisions of Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962 vis-a-vis provisions of Section 245C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 18. In the case of DCM v. Union of India [1999 (109) E.L.T. 12 (S.C.)], the Hon ble Supreme Court has examined the relevant date for determination of duty of Customs. On the issue of relevant date for payment, the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Apar Pvt. Ltd. [1999 (112) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] was also referred to by the Commission. In other words, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rry out the objectives of the Act. The language employed therein even though executive voiced, is more often than not, demonstrative of the legislative purpose So viewed, the Intendment of the statute is furthered if an ex-employee too is held entitled to seek relief under Section 20(2) of the Act. 19. From the provisions in the format it is apparent that the additional duty liability is with reference to duty assessed and paid in the bill of entry/shipping bill and not in other declaration, guarantee, bond etc. which might be a requirement to ensure intended use/compliance of law. It is apparent that, the liability has to be determined with reference to duty levied and collected under the bill of entry and conditions attached at the poi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plicants have admitted an amount of Rs. 35,01,573/- (i.e. Rs. 24,05,470/- towards Customs duty and Rs. 10,96,103/- towards interest.) Therefore, the case is settled for an amount of Rs. 35,01,573/- inclusive of interest. In this case the applicant had earlier admitted an amount of Rs. 24,05,470/- which was allowed to be adjusted by the Commission towards Rs. 21,30,000/- which was recovered by the Revenue by encashing the Bank Guarantee etc. and the balance of Rs. 2,75,470/- was allowed to be adjusted from the surplus amount which was recovered by the Revenue by encashment of Bank Guarantee given for the licence No. 08000097 dated 22-8-97 for which the applicant had filed another application. Now the applicant has admitted an amount of Rs. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
