9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t - Appeal No. C/193/2006-SM(BR) - Final Order No. 893/2006-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 24-5-2006 - [Order] - Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs. Vide impugned order, the Commissioner of Customs held that the appellants are liable to pay supervision charges in respect of in-bond manufacturing facility. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itoring and supervising the operations of the unit was assigned to the Range Officer, therefore, there was no need to create or post exclusive staff for this purpose. The appellant also relied upon the Customs (Fees for Rendering Services by Customs Officer) Regulation, 1998 and also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shree Pipes Ltd. v. Union of India reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants only liable to pay the establishment charges as per the Regulation (Fees for Rendering Services, by Customs Officers) Regulation, 1998 only on MOT basis. 6. The contention of the Revenue is that as per permission letter whereby the manufacturer and other parts were permitted in the warehouse, the appellant is liable to pay the establishment charges and the Commissioner in the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 998 and Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shree Pipes Ltd. (supra) held that an EOU is liable to pay charges as per the Regulation. The Tribunal in the case of G.T. Cargo Fittings India (P) Ltd. (supra) which was followed in the case of Nath Bros. Exim International Ltd. (supra) held that no doubt the assessee is liable to pay the charges as per the conditions of the bond but in absence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
