2010 (12) TMI 396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons intimating the Department about the supply of goods to JBIC - As far as the contention of the Revenue that, the Commissioner (Appeals) has not taken into consideration the declarations made on the invoices; admittedly nothing prevented the department to take action at that stage and to deny the benefit of the notification to the respondent - Find that the permission applied for by the responde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pondents are engaged in the manufacture of ceramics falling under sub-heading 8546.00 of CETA, 1985. They availed the benefit of exemption Notification No. 108/95-C.E., dated 28-8-95. The Notification grants exemption to International Organization under the United Nations of Privilege and Immunities Act, 1947. In the present case, Japan Bank for International Co-operation (JBIC) is not an Internat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f duty available under the Notification of GIMF (Department of Revenue) No. 108/95, dated 20-8-95 as amended vide Notification No. 4/99-C.E., dated 11-2-99". The contention is that the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 108/95-C.E., since the JBIC is not an International Organization declared in terms of Section 3 of the United Nations of Privilege and Immunities Act .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y declarations under Rule 173B, claiming exemption under Notification No. 108/95 with details of reference to purchase orders, contracts and certificates issued by MSEB and that before removal of the subject goods they had sought for permission to make duty free clearances vide their letter dated 22-1-2001 addressed to the jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner with full details backed by relevant doc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fication to the respondent. We further find that the permission applied for by the respondents, has not been rejected by the Department at any stage. Thus the Department failed to establish that there was suppression of fact or willful misstatement etc., on the part of the respondent. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the demand as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X