9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port Regulations, 1986 were available at the inception, namely at the time of filing of the Bill of Entry. It has to be noticed that, at the first instance, the importer did not get the assessment under CTH 98.01 based on any mis-statement in respect of information or on the basis of an erroneous document. The Department had declined their request for assessment under CTH 98.01 as Project Import. When it was declined, the importer protested and pursued the matter and the Department thereafter noticing the error rectified the mistake by passing the order of reassessment under CTH 98.01 as Project Import extending the benefit of Notification No.16/2000. If the first assessment, on subsequent examination, is found to be based on documents or information furnished, which is not true, then the question of invoking Section 17(4) of the Customs Act (as it stood then) will arise. As regards the applicability of Board Circular No.64/2000-Cus., dated 26.7.2000, the Tribunal has stated that the circular is clarificatory in nature and is applicable to cases were the benefit under EPCG Scheme was denied on the ground that EPCG licence was neither obtained nor produced at the time of assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h enclosure to the letter dated 24.1.2001, referred supra, is a letter issued by the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, bearing Letter No.520/B2/2001-1, dated 19.1.2001, which letter has been extracted as a part of the order of the Tribunal. The said letter dated 19.1.2001 of the Government clearly states that the goods to be imported by the importer fall under the category of freely importable goods and they are not in the negative list of imports. It is also stated that the goods are covered under Heading 98.01 of the Custom Tariff Act, as applicable for power generated projects as per Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue Notification No.54/97 Customs, dated 5.6.1997, and are, therefore, entitled to concessional customs duty under Power Generation Project . 2.3. Armed with this letter dated 19.1.2001 issued by the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, the importer filed a Bill of Entry No.003912, dated 8.2.2001 and requested the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group VI, Chennai, to register the contract under the Power Generation Project claiming benefit of Customs No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication No.16/2000. That request of the importer was considered favourably by the Department and the Bill of Entry was reassessed on 13.5.2002, extending the benefit conferred under the Project Import Regulations and the Notification No.16/2000. In the said reassessment order, there was a demand for payment of interest from 29.3.2001 till the date of payment of duty on the Bill of Entry in terms of Board Circular No.64/2000-Cus., dated 26.7.2000. On 14.5.2002, the importer paid the duty reassessed and interest under protest and goods were allowed to be cleared. 2.8. The Department has not chosen to file an appeal against the reassessment order. On the contrary, the importer filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) challenging that portion of the order relating to levy of interest for the period from 29.3.2001 to 13.5.2002. The appeal was considered on merits and dismissed on 12.11.2002. 2.9. Assailing the said order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), the importer filed an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal after considering various factors allowed the appeal of the importer. 2.10. Challenging the said order passed by the Tribunal, the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as assessed provisionally denying the benefits of EPCG Scheme, as EPCG licence was not produced at the time of assessment. The importer did not clear the goods. Subsequently, the importer got the EPCG licence issued and submitted to Customs. The Bill of Entry was reassessed allowing the benefits of EPCG Scheme thus reducing the duty liability on the importer. The importer paid the duty so reassessed. A doubt was raised whether the date of original assessment or date of reassessment would be relevant for calculation of interest under Section 47(2) of the Customs Act. Another doubt raised was whether interest would be charged on originally assessed amount for the period during date of original assessment to the date of reassessment and on reassessed amount for the period subsequent to reassessment to date of payment of duty. 2. The issues have been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law, Department of Legal Affairs. It has been clarified that the interest in cases similar to as cited above would be payable on the reassessed amount for the period 2 days after the date of original assessment to the date of payment of duty. 3. Kindly acknowledge receipt of the letter. Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under this Act be reassessed to duty. Therefore the findings of the Commissioner that reassessment is permitted only under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act (even in a normal case where all the information furnished is found true) is not correct. The reassessment in their case has been done under Section 2(2) read with Section 47(1) & (2) of the Customs Act. It is further noticed that the department has not gone in appeal against the reassessment and since the issue envisages reassessment under Section 2(2) of the Act and since the customs have reassessed the goods on 13.5.2002 and the appraising officer has marked it as RE-ASSESSED , as can be seen from the Bill of Entry. The duty becomes finally payable after reassessment and interest is payable after expiry of 2 days from the date of reassessment as the original assessment has been reversed by giving benefit of exemption which was delayed by the customs authorities, in spite of the fact that right from the beginning and at the time of filing of bill of entry they had informed the customs authority that they are importing these 2 numbers of ship unloaders of 2000 T/H capacity of handling coal for North Chennai Thermal Power Statio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. The protest lodged on the assessment made on merits and the act of the importer in pursuing the matter to its logical conclusion would go to show that the importer has not accepted the assessment made on merits. In the present case, the stand of the importer was accepted by the Department on 13.5.2002, on the basis of the very same document which was already available on record on 24.1.2001, as enclosure No.(4). The letter of the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, dated 30.4.2002, does not in any way alter the situation inasmuch as the importer has already submitted the Essentiality Certificate dated 19.1.2001 from the Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai, at the time of submitting application for Project Import Contract Registration on 24.1.2001. It has to be noticed that, at the first instance, the importer did not get the assessment under CTH 98.01 based on any mis-statement in respect of information or on the basis of an erroneous document. The Department had declined their request for assessment under CTH 98.01 as Project Import. When it was declined, the importer protested and pursued the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
