9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iradar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Chatru Singh, AC (AR) ORDER Per: Raju The appellants are engaged in manufacture of vessel and are registered under section 58 and 65 of the Customs Act for manufacture under Bond. Since the manufacture is conducted under supervisions of Customs Officers, the department is entitled to recover Merchant Over Time (MOT) charges or Cost Recovery charges from the appellant. Consequently by a letter dated 6.3.2009, a demand notice was sent to the appellant seeking recovery of ₹ 9,95,614/- on account of Cost Recovery charges. This demand was for the period 1.1.2006 to 30.6.2009. The demand was made on two counts: - (i) That no Cost Recovery charges have been paid for the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner for them to justify the levy. With the expansion or advent of quality infrastructural inputs such as roads, highways network, etc., rapid industrialization and manifold increase of commercial activities can be expected as the most inevitable corollary. Industrialization and increased commercial activities can lead to increase of import and export activity. Both imports and exports of goods are subject to levy of duty. Thus, in the process, the State s revenue gets augmented, apart from increased economic activity and development of human resources. The increase in the quantum of imports and exports therefore has a direct proportionate impact upon the revenue garnering and overall development. As was already noticed supra, appointmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... produce any detail or evidence in respect of the same. Learned AR cited following decision wherein refund of supervision charges was held to be an administrative decision against which no appeal is maintainable. i) Vijai Marine Services - 2010 (252) ELT 378 (Tri-Mum). ii) Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mills Ltd. -2009 (236) ELT 717 (Tri-Del) iii) Long Life Tools (P) Ltd. - 2006 (199) ELT 849 (Tri-Del) iv) I.J. Muthu Foods Pvt. Ltd. - 2011 (274) ELT 455 (Tri-Mum) 3. I have considered rival submissions. I find that so far the issue of recovery of supervision charges is concerned, it is a matter where the CESTAT has jurisdiction as such charges are collected in exercise of powers under Customs Act, however, in respect of rate at which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
