9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 955X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1962 (the Act) and permitted to carry on in-bond manufacturing activities under Section 65 of Act under the EOU scheme. The unit was granted approval to operate under the scheme by the Department of Industrial Approvals vide letter No.PER/75/84/TO-No.172/(84) Misc. dt. 17/9/1984 and Green Card No.150 dt. 2/5/1985. They were permitted to manufacture polished granite slabs for export. They were also permitted to import/indigenously procure capital goods / consumables. The appellants imported capital goods availing exemption under Notification No.13/81-Cus. dt. 9/2/1981 / Notification No.53/97-Cus. dt. 3/6/1997 totally valued Rs.96,78,350/-. During the period ending 16/9/1996, the appellants manufactured and exported polished granite slabs val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Export Oriented Unit scheme subject to certain conditions. Subsequently, the appellant applied for de-bonding and final exit from the 100% EOU scheme vide their letter dt. 17/3/2004. 3. The lower authority issued a show-cause notice dt. 21/11/2007 requiring them to show-cause as to why:- i. An amount of Rs.98,39,883/- (Rupees ninety eight lakhs thirty nine thousand eight hundred eighty three only) being the duty foregone on the capital goods imported duty free should not be demanded along with interest applicable and recovered as per the Notification No.13/81-Cus dt. 9/2/1981 as amended read with notification No.53/97-Cus dt. 3/6/1997. ii. The capital goods valued Rs.96,78,350/- imported duty free should not be held liable for confiscati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l goods for the extended period and the appellant has to achieve such export obligation as is prescribed for the said value". The lower authority had to quantify the assessable value after depreciation in 1996 but before extension upto 2001, taking into consideration the export obligation on the capital goods. As the same capital goods had been used in the manufacture and export of goods during the extended period, there was no question of violation or confiscation and the appellants were entitled for depreciation on the said capital goods till the extended period ending 2001 as the capital goods had been used in the manufacture of goods exported. 6. The Commissioner found that the assessee had not imported additional capital goods during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve year period from 17/9/1996. The appellant had failed to continue the operations owing to reverses suffered by them and disputes in the family of the concerned. The Development Commissioner had allowed de-bonding in principle vide his order dt. 8/1/2002. Vide letters dt. 29/10/2004, 6/12/2004, 17/02/2005, 24/2/2005, 28/3/2005, 1/4/2005, 7/7/2005, 8/8/2005, 8/6/2006, 27/6/2006, 5/4/2007, 7/5/2007 and 27/7/2007, the appellant requested the Commissioner for de-bonding the warehoused goods. The subject proceedings were initiated by issue of show-cause notice on 22/11/2007. The appellant relied on the Solitaire Machine Tools P. Ltd. case in support of the claim that duty was payable on de-bonding on the depreciated value of the goods as on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
