9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1432X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The erstwhile Notification No. 53/97-Cus., dated 3-6-1997 and the current Notification No. 52/2003 dated 31-3-2003 exempt specified goods, when imported into India or procured from a Public warehouse or Private warehouse licensed under Section 58 of the Customs Act, for the purpose manufacture of articles for export out of India, by 100% Export Oriented Unit, from the whole of duty of Customs leviable thereon under the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and the Additional Duty, if any leviable thereon under Section 3 of the said Customs Tariff Act subject to the conditions specified in the said Notification. The said notifications exempts only Basic Customs Duty leviable under First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1985 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been reported. 5. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against the respondents culminating into an order passed by the Joint Commissioner confirming the duty against the demand along with confirmation of demand and imposing penalties of identical amounts. The said demands stand confirmed by the original adjudicating authority by invoking the extended period. 6. Being aggrieved with the said confirmation of demand, respondents filed the appeals before Commissioner (Appeals). The appellate authority held that the assesses having procured the High Diesel Oil from the warehouse, which in turn was imported by ESSAR Oil Ltd. and was warehoused by them without payment of Customs duty including additional duty imposed under Finance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnational v. CCE, Kandla reported as 2010 (100) RLTONLINE 116 (CESTAT-LB) = 2010 (256) E.L.T. 556 (Tri. - LB). 8. Apart from the merits of the case, we find that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of limitation are required to be upheld. For better appreciation, we reproduce the relevant paragraph from Commissioner (Appeals) order :- "As contended by the Appellant without prejudice to the forgiving, the demand is also hit by the bar of limitation, in as much as the removal of the goods from the warehouse had been authorised by the Superintendent of Customs, Mundra without payment of any Customs duty and the provision of Notification which the Appellant were authorised to procure the goods ought to have been well kn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
