9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods. The duty amount was debited from the DEPB scrips . We find that there is no dispute that the goods in question are capital goods as held by the Commissioner (Appeals), which was not challenged by the respondent. The Public Notice had clearly imposed restriction of DEPB scrips for payment of customs duty from 07.04.2000, on capital goods. - after the Public Notice dated 07.04.2000, the respondent is not eligible to pay the customs duty by utilizing the DEPB Scrips on the clearance of capital goods. - Following decision of Sai Graphic Systems [2013 (5) TMI 650 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of Revenue. - C/173/2004 - Final Order No. 40662/2014 - Dated:- 25-9-2014 - P. K. Das And R. Periasami,JJ. For the Petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the impugned goods are capital goods, and the respondent is eligible for the benefit of DEPB scrips dated 31.08.99, which was issued prior to the Public Notice. But, the DEPB scrips dated 26.04.2000, produced by the respondent was disallowed as it was issued after Public Notice dated 07.04.2000. The Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeal) in so far as admissibility of DEPB scrips dated 31.08.99. 5. The Ld. AR on behalf of the Revenue submits that the Public Notice dated 07.04.2000, allowed the utilization of the credit under DEPB Scheme for payment of Customs duty for any item, which is freely imported except ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... blic Notice had clearly imposed restriction of DEPB scrips for payment of customs duty from 07.04.2000, on capital goods. In the case of Sai Graphic Systems (supra), the Hon'ble High Court of Madras observed that after the Public Notice, all the clearances would be treated as restricted capital goods as per the Public Notice. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced as under:- 2. In all the writ petitions, the petitioners had imported the second hand Digital Multifunction Print and Copying Machines of various models from their overseas suppliers. The petitioners had filed Bill of Entry and sought for clearance of the goods as Second Hand Capital goods under Free importability in terms of Definitions in Para 9.12 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
