9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ma facie the applicants have fulfilled the condition of Notification No.40/2006. We further find that the bond executed by the applicants against duty free import licence has been cancelled by the Customs authorities in 2010 itself. Therefore, extended period of limitation is not invokable in the facts of the case - stay granted. - C/85394, 85397/13-Mum - - - Dated:- 22-7-2013 - Ashok Jindal And S.K.Gaule, JJ. For the Appellants : Shri J.H.Motwani, Adv For the Respondent : Shri P.M.Saleem, Commissioner (A.R.) PER : Ashok Jindal The applicants are in appeals against the impugned order wherein the demand of duty of Rs.5,33,90,484/- has been confirmed along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty imposed on the main a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on No.40/2006 and as per the condition (vii) of the Notification which stipulates only that exempt materials shall not be disposed of or utilized in any manner, except for utilization in discharge of export obligation before the export obligation under the said authorization has been discharged in full. Admittedly, in this case they have discharged export obligation on 18.04.2008 and they have sold the goods after discharge of export obligation. Therefore, the observation of the learned Commissioner that they have not obtained the permission from DGFT or obtained EODC before the sale of the imported material is beyond the scope of the Notification. Therefore the demands are not sustainable at all. He further submits that the Condition No.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g authority the applicants cannot be dispose of the goods in open market although they discharged the export obligation. He further submits that as the condition of the Notification is violated therefore, the extended period of limitation is invokable. 5. Heard both sides. 6. We find that the Notification 40/2006 does not impose any condition on the licence holder that without the permission from the licensing authority the applicants shall not dispose of the goods after discharging the export obligation. Further, we find that it is not in dispute that the applicants have not discharged the export obligation on 18.04.2008 and it is also not in dispute that the goods have been sold by the applicants in open market after discharging the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
