9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or obtained indigenous raw materials without incidence of duty by following the procedure under Rules 191A or Rules 191B or under Rule 12(1)(b) or 13 (1)(b)of the said Rules. 3. In terms of condition v(a) of Notification No.203/92-Cus referred to above, the export obligation was to be discharged by exporting goods manufactured in India in respect of which no relief of input stage duty was availed under Rule 56A/57A or other Central Excise rules referred to above. 4. Since the appellants had violated the conditions of the Notification No.203/92-Custhe goods exported as above could not be counted towards the discharge of export obligation. The exports so made appeared to be in contravention of the provisions of Section 11(1) of Foreign Trade (Development &Regulation) Act, 1992 and Section 113(d) of Customs Act, 1962 thus rendering the importer liable for penalty in terms of section 114 of Customs Act, 1962. 5. Also goods imported duty free appeared to be not eligible for exemption in terms of Customs Notification No.203/92-Cus and, accordingly, duty on the goods so released was demanded from the importers in terms of section 28(1) of Customs Act, 1962 and goods appeared liable for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere Modvat credit is reversed and the amount of interest is also paid before 31.01.1997 no penal action or prosecution proceedings shall be initiated against the value Based Advance License holder. (e) The Value Based Advance License holders who fail to reverse the Modvat credit in full before 31st January 1997 shall not be exempt from penal proceedings under the law. 8. The petitioner reversed the MODVAT credit for Rs.75,21,586/-on 26.9.1995, Rs.3,41,939/- and Rs.1,23,303/- on 29.2.1996. Further a reversal was made for Rs.18,27,721/- towards interest on 29.1.1997 as contemplated in the scheme. 9. On the petitioner further reversing credit for a sum of Rs.1,49,266/- as directed, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Pondicherry issued a certificate dated 13.2.1997 to the effect that the petitioner reversed total MODVAT credit of Rs.81,46,490/- in respect of clearance of input under VABAL from August, 1993 to 9.3.1995 and also debited an amount of Rs.19,22,371/- as interest on the above credit. Out of the amount of Rs.19,23,371/-, Rs.18,27,721/- was reversed on 31.1.1997 and the balance on 6.2.1997. 10. After further verification on 3.9.1997, the Assistant Commissioner o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other contention that the compliance of the condition has to be considered in respect of each licence also merits consideration as in the show cause notices itself the duty payable as against each licence was calculated and given separately. In addition to that, clause (b) of the scheme is also provided in the same way by stating that if the condition as contemplated in clause (a0 is completed by 31.1.1997 thereupon no demand of customs duty leviable on goods imported against the value based advance licence in question shall be payable The VABAL licences in question or in dispute are 13 licences, which are the subject matter of two show cause notices stated above. Hence this contention s accepted. 39. Therefore, the orders of to the respondents are hereby set aside and the matter is sent back to the second respondent to consider the issue of quantifying the duy taking into account the reversal of duty and interest by the petitioner as certified by the competent Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and proceed further thereupon, by allowing the writ petitions. Consequent to this order, the Commissioner of Customs has passed an adjudication order dt.7.10.05 quantifying the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the debtor has the option to make payment towards the liabilities that he chooses and the creditor cannot appropriate such payments in the manner creditor chooses. 17. Opposing the prayer, Ld. AR for Revenue submits that the Hon. High Court has directed that reversals made and the interest paid should be considered licence-wise. Therefore, a question arises as to the order in which payment made are to be appropriated. The most logical step is to arrange the licenses in chronological order and start appropriating the amounts paid by appellant towards dues towards each of these licences and that is what is done in the impugned order. In this method of calculation the appellant failed to discharge the obligation as per the amnesty scheme in respect of two licences. Consequently, the demand of Rs.2,05,99,517/- is confirmed in the impugned order. His argument is that the order of the Commissioner is based on logic and is in conformity with the High Court's order and therefore the impugned order may be confirmed. 18. We have considered the submissions on both sides. We find that if the appellants had paid about Rs.5 lakhs more as on 31.1.97,their entire liability under the 14 licences ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
