9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of Notification No. 103/2009-Cus., dated 11-9-2009. After clearance of the goods the officers of Revenue received intelligence that the model number and year of manufacture declared at the time of clearance were false and they conducted examination of the goods at different sites where machines were installed. During examination they detected manipulation of the model number and year of make embossed on the manufacture of the machines. It was found that the year of manufacture was 1995-1996 for the machines whereas the applicants had declared model numbers of the year 2000. 3. Revenue was of the view that this manipulation in the description of the machines was done for availing Technology Up-gradation Fund Scheme (TUF Scheme) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 of the Import Policy clearly states that there is no restriction regarding age of machines being imported if the 3% duty scheme is availed. 5. They also submit that there has been no mis-declaration made by them in the import documents which aspect they will prove during the final hearing of the appeal. At this stay stage, their submission is essentially that they had no intention of availing to TUF Scheme and if at all they had an intention they cannot be penalised for having an intention so long as no revenue loss has occurred. They also submit that they did not contravene any of the provisions of Notification No. 103/2009-Cus. which they availed. 6. The counsel for the appellants submits that even if the contention of Reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of revenue would have occurred. According to him the mis-declarations were already made in the Bills of Entry and hence the goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 and therefore the redemption fine imposed and the penalties are maintainable, if at all the duty demand confirmed is held to be not maintainable for the reason that conditions of Notification 103/09-Cus. have not been contravened. He points out that as per the condition of the EPCG license the applicants were covered by para 5.8 of the Hand book of Procedures for Import and Export. (However, this para does not in any way indicate that it is applicable only to goods imported under TUF Scheme). Therefore he pleads that the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
