Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (10) TMI 499

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... REPRESENTED BY : Shri R. Nair, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri J.S. Negi, AR, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. These appeals are by the assessee against Order-in-Appeal No. KU/414/VAPI/2005, dated 30-11-2005. 2. Since the issue involved in these appeals is common and in respect of same assessee, they are being disposed off by a common order. 3. The brief facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant herein is a 100% EOU. The appellant was permitted by Development Commissioner to import burned transformers and dis-assemble them and thereafter segregate dis-assembled transformer in respect of copper/aluminium/ferrous waste and scrap. The appellant was issued a Show Cause Notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... etter dated 18-9-2001 of Development Commissioner, SEEPZ SEZ Mumbai. It is his submission that if the activity would amount to manufacture, then the question of Customs duty would not arise as the said goods have been utilized for manufacturing activities. He would draw our attention to the decision of Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Surat v. Sanjari Twisters - 2009 (235) E.L.T. 116, in the case of Dupont Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Surat - 2010 (259) E.L.T. 408, in case of STL Exports Ltd. v. C.C., Indore - 2004 (164) E.L.T. 179, in the case of C.C.E., Surat v. Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. - 2007 (216) E.L.T. 589 upheld by Hon ble Apex Court 2010 (254) E.L.T. A98 (S.C.). 5. Ld. A.R. on behalf of the Revenue, on the other hand, would s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... een cleared to melting units. 8. We find from the record that there is no dispute that the appellant had been granted LOP No. PER:92(2001)/seepz/eou-47/2001-02, dated 18-9-2001 by the Development Commissioner, SEEPZ, Mumbai for segregation of ferrous and non-ferrous scrap or Computer and Electric scrap. It is also seen that the said activity was considered as an activity of manufacture by the authorities, which is reiterated by DGFT vide Circular No. 01/92/182/282/Amo4/VCII/431, dated 29-10-2004, wherein the DGFT has clearly indicated that the unit already set up prior to 1-4-2002 have to be treated differently from the unit set up after 1-4-2002. In other words, an unit engaged in segregation activity, which was set up prior to 1-4-2002 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f which have produced end use certificate before the lower authorities which has been discarded by the lower authorities as certificate on the ground that they have been produced at a later date. In our considered view, such narrow view taken by the lower authorities is incorrect. If the benefit of notification is available to the assessee, on imports goods and produces end use certificate of consumption of the same, benefit of notification cannot be denied to him. We find that in this case, there is no dispute that certificates which was produced are correct, we find that the Tribunal in the case of Ratangiri Textiles, in identical situation held as under : Both the appellants are 100% EOUs. Being so, their clearances to Domestic Tariff .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the effective rate and not tariff rate. During the hearing of the case, learned Counsels for the appellants placed before us a copy of the judgment of the Supreme Court dismissing the Special Leave Petition filed against the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Lucky Star International and Others reported in 2001 (134) E.L.T. 26 (Gujarat). The judgment of the Gujarat High Court was common for Lucky Star International and Varsha Exports cases. Apart from this, is the Circular dated 19th February, 1998 of the Ministry. The Circular clarified as under : 2. Board have examined the issue carefully and find that the duty leviable under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act is to be calculated after giving effect to the exemption not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates