9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 785X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cuting a bond by the importer of the goods. As the contemporaneous evidences which have been shown by the appellant are enough to hold that the goods which were imported were consumed for the manufacture of leather goods which were finally exported and that the Chartered Accountant's certificate coupled with the affidavit of the partner (who is now deceased) is considered as enough evidence to hold that the appellant had consumed the goods imported in the manufacture of leather goods - thus benefit of notification is to be given to assessee which does not have any condition of giving the end use certificate from the Central Excise authorities - in favour of assessee. - C/565/2011 - Final Order No. A/1222/2012-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 2-8-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal to first appellate authority, who remanded the matter back to adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh. In the second round of litigation also, the demand was confirmed and the matter travelled to the Tribunal. Tribunal vide Final Order No.A/1926/WZB/AHD/2010, dt.14.12.2010 remanded the matter back to the appellate authority to reconsider the issue afresh without insisting upon any pre-deposit. The first appellate authority in the impugned order before us today in de-novo proceedings again upheld the demand of differential duty confirmed by the adjudicating authority. Hence, this appeal. 4. Ld.Senior Consultant would take us through the order of the Tribunal dt.14.12.2010 and more specifically the Paragraphs 3, 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with these evidences. It is his submission that instead of cancelling the said bond, they were asked to prove the end use, only by production of certificate signed by the Central Excise Department. He would submit that when there is no condition of producing the end use certificate in the notification itself, the same condition cannot be asked for by the lower authorities. It is his submission that despite that they have been able to produce some sort of evidence regarding the consumption of the material in the manufacture of the goods which were exported. It is his submission that both the lower authorities are not disputing this position. 5. Ld.D.R., on the other hand, would submit that the appellant herein had executed a bond wherei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certificate regarding the receipt of the foreign exchange received from the parties to whom the appellant had exported the consignments of leather articles, which is annexed with the certificate of State Bank of India. 8. On this factual matrix, we have to consider the Notification No.224/85-Cus, dt.9.7.85 which is reproduced under: Notification No.224/85-Cus, dt.9.7.85 Specified Goods for use in Leather Industry: In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the goods specified in column (2) of the Table hereto annexed, when imported into India for use in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring tape, designers tapes and satra vacuum former. 19. Industrial sewing machine needles with leather point. 20. Bell skiving knives. 21. Dand knife for splitting machine. 22. Cutting and clicking dies. 23. Aluminum shoe forms with or without heating elements. 24. Silver marking pencils. 9. It can be seen from the above reproduced notification that the said notification does not have any condition of giving the end use certificate from the Central Excise authorities. It can also been seen that the said notification also does not include any condition of executing a bond by the importer of the goods. 10. We find that the appellants have m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idence in the form of Chartered Accountant s certificate can also be considered for coming to a conclusion as to whether the appellant has been able to prove the consumption of the goods imported by them in the manufacture of leather goods or not. 14. As we have already recorded that the Chartered Accountant s certificate coupled with the affidavit of the partner (who is now deceased) is considered as enough evidence to hold that the appellant had consumed the goods imported in the manufacture of leather goods, we find that the impugned order is unsustainable and not correct. 15. In view of the foregoing, we hold that the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
