9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Excise, Surat, confirming demands of duty and imposing penalties upon them. 2. We heard Shri J.C. Patel and Shri Willingdon Christain, ld. Advocates, appearing for the appellants and Shri K.J. Sanchis, ld. DR appearing for the revenue. 3. As per facts on record, M/s. Shiva Exports and M/s. Vimla Fashion Pvt. Ltd., imported POY under DEEC Scheme and by availing exemption from payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 203/92-Cus. 204/94-Cus. The exemption in terms of the said Notification is available to POY imported into India for use in the finished final products to be exported. Inasmuch as the said POY was to be converted into texturised yarn, another Notification No. 34/94-CE, dated 1-3-94 was issued, which exempted the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. 5. After carefully considering the submissions made by both sides, we find that Notification No. 34/94-C.E., dated 1-3-94 as amended, exempted Texturised Synthetics Filament Yarn falling within Chapter 54 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and manufactured out of filament yarn imported under the duty exemption scheme of the Export and Import Policy, from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, which is specified in the said Schedule. Proviso to the said Notification laid down that the exemption contained in the Notification shall be applicable only if it is proved to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise that such texturised yarn is to be exported or used in the manufacture of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the texturisers in the present case received the POY from M/s. Shiva Exports and M/s. Vimla Fashion Pvt. Ltd., under the cover of their letter along with a photocopy of Bill of Entry as also undertaking given by them to their jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. A certificate giving the details of the advance licence and DEEC book, was also forwarded by the said importer. On the basis of the said documents, the appellants wrote to their jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner intimating him about the receipt of POY and availing of benefit of Notification No. 34/94, dated 1-3-1994. They also forwarded all the documents received by them from the principal importer. A copy of the said intimation was also forwarded to their jurisdictional Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n by the importers, intimated their jurisdictional Central Excise authorities about the receipt of the said POY, maintained all the statutory records and cleared the goods under statutory documents. As such, all the requisite procedures as detailed in the Surat Commissionerate Trade Notice stands duly followed by them. It is the importer of POY, who has given the legal undertaking to their jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for discharge of duty in case the goods are not used for the purpose of export. Though the Commissioner has observed that the said legal undertaking given by the importer was not accepted by the Assistant Commissioner, but the fact remains that such legal undertaking was given by them. A copy of the same was forwarded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The said decision took note of the Board s Circular Nos. 87/87/94-CX, dated 26-12-94 clarifying that where merchant exporter has executed a bond, liability to pay duty will be of the merchant exporter. Similarly, in the case of CCE v. Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Order No. E/99/1996B, dated 11-3-1996, the Tribunal held that where plot holders in the Santa Cruz Electronics Export Processing Zone have executed a bond for fulfilment of the condition and on being satisfied with the bond executed by them, the officer-in-charge of the security has issued a certificate and based upon that certificate, respondents have supplied the goods to the respective plot holders, demand with regard to the quantity not exported is required to be raised only agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investigation, have deposed that the texturised yarn has not been received by them from the said job workers. However, we find that the texturised yarn was cleared from the factory of the job workers under the cover of Central Excise invoices as also delivery challans. Such documents were filed with the revenue along with RT-12 returns and are issued in the name of the merchant exporter. As against the above documentary evidence, there are statements of the merchant exporter only. Further, it has not been shown to us that the merchant exporter, who has sent POY worth crores of rupees to the said job workers, have initiated any action against them for non-supply of the texturised yarn. Considering the entire evidence on record, it has to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
