9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 946X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nals India Pvt. Ltd. It was engaged in the business of export of electronic goods including EDC terminals also known as point-of-sale terminals. The petitioner was granted advance license bearing No. 0310376099/3/03/00 dated 17-4-2006 by the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Mumbai, for import of goods without payment of customs duty against discharge of export obligation of Rs. 11,05,55,250/- by exporting 17,000 nos. of EDC terminals. The period stipulated for fulfillment of export obligation was 24 months from the date of issue of license. It is stated, export goods manufactured by the petitioner from the supporting manufacturer were exported directly from the supporting manufacturer's premises after due examination and scrutiny. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shipping bills as DEEC shipping bills. The petitioner was granted personal hearing on 26-12-2007. Thereafter, the second respondent issued letter dated 21-2-2009 to the Bank which furnished Bank guarantee on behalf of the petitioner to encash the original Bank guarantee. The petitioner informed the first respondent on 29-4-2009 that the second respondent has sought to encash Bank guarantee and therefore, the matter may be disposed of early. 6. The first respondent passed Order-in-Original No. 15/2009 on 18-5-2009 rejecting the request of the petitioner for conversion of 15 free shipping bills into DEEC shipping bills. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original dated 18-5-2009, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the CESTAT, Bangalore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the petitioner had imported goods, utilized and exported it. Without any valid reason, the Bank guarantees have been invoked by the Respondents 1 and 2. There is no demand by the Respondents 1 and 2. Without demand the Bank guarantee cannot be invoked. Further he submitted that the factory stuff was verified by the officers and no proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner has discharged his export obligation and therefore, invoking of Bank guarantees was not correct. Therefore, the Respondents 1 and 2 may be directed to refund Rs. 2,17,41,000/-. He placed reliance on the decision reported in 2010 (249) E.L.T. page 481 to contend that invoking of Bank guarantee without demand was illegal. 9. As against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Rs. 2,17,41,000/-. 12. The advance license has been issued to the petitioner on 17-4-2006 by the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Mumbai, for import of goods without payment of customs duty against discharge of export obligation of Rs. 11,05,55,250/- by exporting 17,000 nos. of EDC terminals. The period stipulated for fulfilment of export obligation was 24 months. The petitioner contends that export obligation has been fulfilled. According to the petitioner, the export started from 26-5-2006 and ended on 22-1-2007. The petitioner submitted requisite documents to the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Mumbai, for redemption of license and issue of Export Obligation Discharge Certificate. The bills produced by the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lled the export obligation :- A. For physical exports :- (ii) EP copy of the shipping bill(s) containing details of shipment effected or bill of export in case of export to SEZ. 4.26 In case the export obligation has been fulfilled, the Regional Authority shall redeem the case. After redemption, the Regional Authority shall forward a copy of the redemption letter indicating the shipping bill number(s), date(s), FOB value in Indian rupees as per shipping bill(s) and description of export product to the Customs Authority at the port of registration. Such details shall also be placed by the zonal offices in their website immediately after issuance of the export obligation discharge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
