9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 900W as US $ 1,82,500/- and paid Customs Duty of Rs. 74,29,213/- on provisional basis. In respect of Crane Model No. 999C, the appellants declared its value as US $ 1,60,000/- and paid Customs Duty of Rs. 32,32,461/- on provisional basis. The Cranes were assessed provisionally under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the purpose of paying the said duty amounts. These Cranes were old and used and were imported on a temporary basis subject to re-export condition on completion of the contract. Thereafter, the cranes were re-exported under the cover of drawback under shipping bills. Both the sides have referred to the shipping bill in relation to Model No. 999C during the proceedings, but the shipping bill for Model No. 3900W, which is ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r capacity Crane of 1966 make, imported under Bill of Entry dated 22-8-1998, was equivalent to Rs. 1,74,30,000/- FOB. The CIF value of the said Crane was after adjustments worked out at Rs. 82,81,530/-, and a demand of differential duty amount of Rs. 6,90,416/- was made, which came to be confirmed. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellants in these appeals has strongly contended that, though duty drawback was allowed when the goods were re-exported @ 85% of the provisional duty paid for Crane Model No. 999C and 70% of the provisional duty paid for Crane Model No. 3900W, duty drawback entitlement was not taken into consideration in respect of enhanced value worked out in respect of these two Cranes. It was submitted that, under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Model No. 999C, duty of Rs. 32,32,461 /- was paid on provisional basis and a duty drawback of Rs. 27,47,592/- was a lowed when it was re-exported. There is also no dispute about the fact that, in respect of Model No. 3900W, duty amount paid on provisional basis was Rs 74,29,213/- as against which drawback @ 70% amounting to Rs. 52,44,491/- was allowed when it was re-exported. These drawbacks were allowed under Section 74(2) of the said Act in the context of the duties paid on provisional assessment. As per the Notification No. MF(DR)No. 19-Cus. dated 6th February, 1965, amended by Notification dated 8th November, 1969 and 2nd May, 1970; when the length of period between the date of clearance for home consumption and the date when the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal basis. We do not find any valid reason to take a different view of the matter on the valuation aspect. We, therefore, while confirming the duty demanded on the enhanced assessable value of these two Cranes direct that drawback @ 85% for Model No. 999C and @ 70% for Model No. 3900W should be allowed in the context of the enhanced duty liability, which is confirmed under the impugned orders. Both the appeals are accordingly partly allowed with a direction to the Original Authority to work out the amounts of drawback on the aforesaid basis. it is stated that the appellants have paid Rs. 16,00,000/- by way of pre-deposit. If that be so, the Original Authority will give appropriate adjustments. The Original Authority may take its decision ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
