2009 (7) TMI 1040

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ives so as to make the manufacturer to compete in international market. So, there is no scope to pass incidence of duty to foreign buyers. Hence, the appellant established that the amount of duty in relation to which refund was claimed was not collected from any other person - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Shri P.K. Das, J. None, for the Appellant. Shri Ishtikhar Baig, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants imported one "Circular Knitting Machine" classifiable under sub-heading No. 8447.90 of the Customs Tariff Act under EPCG Scheme. They claimed exemption of CVD benefit under Notification No. 29/97-Cus., dated 1-4-97. The Bill of Entry was assessed denying th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s that the imported machine was captively used in the manufacture of final products and unjust enrichment is applicable. He relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of SRF Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai reported in 2006 (193) E.L.T. 186 (T-LB). He also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Solar Pesticide Ltd. reported in 2000 (116) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.). 4. After hearing ld. DR and on perusal of the records, I find that Notification No. 29/97-Cus. dated 1-4-1997 as amended extended benefit of exemption of duty of capital goods imported under EPCG Scheme (Export Promotion Capital Goods). The importer executes a bond binding himself to fulfil export oblig .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s fact was not disputed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is noted that Government is providing export incentives so as to make the manufacturer to compete in international market. So, there is no scope to pass incidence of duty to foreign buyers. Hence, the appellant established that the amount of duty in relation to which refund was claimed was not collected from any other person. 7. The ld. DR relied upon the case of Solar Pesticide Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that principle of unjust enrichment would apply even on captive consumption of imported goods. In the present case, it has been held that the imported machine captively used in the manufacture of export goods and, therefore, the appellant established that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X