2007 (8) TMI 167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stoms, Bangalore. 2.The appellants are a 100% E.O.U. working under the STP Scheme. Revenue initiated action against them on the ground that they were sharing the imported/procured duty free Capital goods in contravention to the conditions of Notification No. 52/2003-Cus. dated 31-3-2003 and Notification No. 22/2003-C.E. dated 31-3-2003. The Adjudicating authority passed the impugned order demandi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eared for the appellants and Shri Anil Kumar learned JDR for Revenue. 4.Heard both the sides. While the learned DR reiterated the impugned order on the basis of para-wise comments given by the Revenue on the 'Grounds of Appeal' of the appellants, the learned Advocate pointed out that the show cause notice has alleged violation of conditions of Notification No. 52/2003-Cus. dated 31-3-2003 and Not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mises shared by the customer of the appellants had already been debonded on payment of appropriate duty. Moreover, the Adjudicating authority has demanded the duty foregone on the entire goods imported and procured locally. While the Show Cause Notice was invoked the Notification issued in 2003,  it is seen that the Adjudicating authority has given a finding on violation of condition 15 of No .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X