9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al and intent of these statute is to ensure that use of goods imported by manufacturer are for intended purpose - Goods imported by respondent were bulk drugs and same are covered under Sl.No. 80 B of Notification No. 21/2003-Cus. - Impugned order of lower appellate authority does not suffer from any irregularity and is upheld – Decided in favour of assessee. - C/23/2005 - FINAL ORDER: 41210 / 2015 - Dated:- 27-8-2015 - Shri R. Periasami, Technical Member And Shri P.K. Choudhary, Judicial Member For the Petitioner : Ms. Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) For the respondent : Shri N. Anand, Adv., ORDER Per: P.K. Choudhary In this case the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) vide OIA C.Cus. No. 641/2004 dated 31.08.2004 had allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of clearance/import and hence have not complied with the conditions of the Customs (Import of goods on concessional rate of duty for manufacture of excisable goods )Rules, 1996 and Condition No.5 of Customs Notification No. 21/2003. Aggrieved by the above OIO the importer preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide OIA, C.Cus. 641/2004 dated 31.08.2004 allowed the appeal by annulling the order in original. 4. Ld. AC, AR reiterated the grounds of appeal and filed copies of Notification No. 36/96-Cus (N.T) dated 23.07.1996 as amended of Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996 and a list containing effective rates of basic and additional duty for specified g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LT 547 (Tri.-Chen.) 2. CCE, Chandigarh-I Vs. J.C.T. Electronics Ltd. 2011 (267) ELT 41 (P H) 6. On hearing both sides and on perusal of records, we find that the Bill of Entry No. 550344 was filed on 28.06.2003, and the imported consignment was cleared on 30.06.2003. Registration under Rule 3 was done on 14.07.2003 and the application under Rule 4 was filed on 18.07.2003. All these requirements are merely procedural and the intent of these statute is to ensure that the use of the goods imported by the manufacturer are for the intended purpose as declared in the application. Rule 3 4 of (IGCRDMEG) are reproduced here for understanding the statutory interpretation. Rule 3. Registration (1) A manufacturer intending to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the application that the imported goods shall be used for the intended purpose. (3) The application shall be countersigned by the {Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise} who shall certify therein that the manufacturer is registered in his office and has executed {a bond to his satisfaction} in respect of end use of the imported goods in the manufacturers factory and indicate the particulars of such bond. 7. Para 8, 9 10 of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is reproduced for appreciation of the statutory interpretation. 8. Additionally on plain reading of the Customs (IGCRD) Rule, 1996, I find that there is nothing therein which cannot be done after the importation )but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
