9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Judgment per : N. Kumar, J.]. - The revenue has preferred this appeal challenging the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore [2007 (207) E.L.T. 85 (Tri.-Bang.).] which has set aside the order of confiscation of goods and imposition of fine and penalty on the ground that there is violation of Section 111(o) of the Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry obligation equivalent to nine time of CIF value of capital goods for import under the licence within a period of six years from the date of issue of the said licence in the proportions mentioned in the order of the Tribunal Condition No. (5) required the importer to import capital goods up to the thresh hold level of Rs. One Crore. The said condition was not complied with. As the assessee was u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they have paid. Therefore, the question of confiscation on the ground of non-compliance of the terms of the said notification would not arise. Therefore, the order of confiscation, fine and penalty was set aside. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue assailing the impugned order contends that when once the assessee did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... availing the benefit of importing goods, they pay the duty. If it does not perform its export obligations, then, it can be said that he has violated the terms of the notification. Though in the instant case, relying on the said notification, the assessee imported the capital goods but not to the extent of Rs. 1 Crore, he cannot have the benefit of waiver of duty. It is under these circumstances, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
