9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t did not get any permission for carrying out degaussing and alignment of CRT from the appropriate authority. Similarly, plastic cabinets were imported without indicating any manufacturing process to be carried thereon in absence of entry in LOP in that regard. Similarly spray painting does not amount to manufacture. Those were neither meant for export nor independently manufactured but used as accessories. As per LOP, CPT and moulded cabinets were raw-materials and those were not subjected to a manufacturing process for which those are not included in the list of items to be manufactured while LOP was granted. Therefore, CPT and PMT cleared in DTA were mere imported materials and components only. The appellant also did not inform to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his appeal came up against Adjudication made on 31/08/2009 with following consequences:- (i) Customs Duty amounting to ₹ 43,97,261/- (Rupees Forty Three Lac Ninety Seven Thousand Two Hundred Sixty One only) was imposed on the imported raw material recoverable from M/s. Five Core Electronics Ltd. F-622, Phase - I, RIICO Industrial Area, Bhiwadi, under proviso to section 28 (i) of Customs Act, 1962 (herein after referred to as the Act ) with interest thereon under Section 28AB of the Act. (iii) Penalty of ₹ 43,97,261/- was imposed under Section 114 A of the Act on M/s. Five Core Electronics Ltd. However, concession thereon was allowed subject to deposit of duty and interest thereon within thirty days from the date of commun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prejudice to Revenue. According to appellant, the process of degaussing and aligning CPT amounts to manufacture. The CPT imported was subjected to such process before clearance to DTA. Similarly the plastic moulded cabinet imported being a raw material for manufacture of final product, making painting and shaping there was no violation of the condition of notification. 3.2 Appellant further submitted that a show cause notice was issued on 02/07/2008 in respect of the clearance made against the import of the period 01/05/2006-31/03/2007. Therefore when the import was within the knowledge of the authority, and use of imported goods in manufacture of exportable goods were also on record, there cannot be any suspicion as to the suppress ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without any signature of designated authority) was to remain in force for one year from the date of issue. According to appellant, the DTA permission enabled the appellant to clear 14,416 of picture tubes in DTA. Therefore, the demand raised in adjudication order shall not sustain both on merit and limitation. Further, no penalty is imposable. 3.4 Ld. Counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of STL Exports Ltd. Vs. CC, Indore [2004 (164) ELT 179 (Tri. - Del.)] to submit that upon demand of central excise duty, there cannot be demand of custom duty in respect of the same product and for the same period under para - 7 of Notification No.53/97-Cus. Reliance was also placed on Larger Bench decision of the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ving mechanical rings present on defection unit of the CPT. The inserted CPT were subjected to the process of degaussing and alignment. This process is basically aimed at removing colour patches that may form due to any magnetic field on the screen of the CPT when in use. Similarly, the cabinet parts were subject to spray painting on their outer surface to make them better looking and further use. 4.2 Revenue precisely submits that degaussing does not amount to manufacture and cabinet re-painting is also not manufacture. 4.3 Heard both sides and perused the record. 5.1 Ld. Adjudicating Authority while examining the contentions of the appellant as well as the evidence on record has found that CPT and PMC were removed from DTA withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and sold in the DTA. There was failure to fulfil the conditions of the Notification 52/2003-Cus., dated 31/03/2003. The duty free goods not being used in manufacture violation of condition of export calls for recovery of the customs duty foregone by the Department. 6. The citations relied on by the appellant are not profitable to it when there was no manufacturing of CPT and cabinet activity carried out by them. Degaussing and spray painting is not known in trade parlance as manufacturing activity. When the goods imported were declared to be used in manufacturing process, but not so used, the duty foregone on import thereof is recoverable. The goods sold in DTA were the imported CPT and PMC misconceiving that manufacturing was done. Thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
