9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... araman, Member (T) Order: T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - The Revenue is aggrieved over the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 16/2004 (G) Cus. dated 12-10-2004, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Guntur. 2. The Respondents, M/s. Aravic Aqua Farms (P) Ltd. is a 100% E.O.U. During the financial years 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98, they imported raw materials and capital goods under the 100% E.O.U. Scheme without payment of duty. The duty forgone amounts to Rs. 4,00,158/-. In terms of the Notification No. 196/94-Cus., dated 8-2-1994, they were required to fulfil the export obligations. However due to various circumstances, the Respondents could not fulfil the export obligations and the Development Commissioner, Visakhapatna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of commercial production. In the absence of comercial production the learned DR argued that it is wrong to give the benefit of the depreciation. 5. The learned Advocate filed the cross-objections and reiterated the contentions put forward in the cross-objections. He explained the circumstances under which the Respondents could not fulfil the export obligations. He invited the Bench's attention to the Hon'ble Apex Court's order according to which all the Aqua Culture units in the Eastern Coast had to be closed in view of the costal Regulations. Further he pointed out that in spite of the best efforts of the Respondents there were 5-6 crop failures as a result, the Respondents could not fulfil the export obligations. However, he pointed o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and also the Supreme Court order was also not in favour of the continuance of the Aqua Culture units. In view of these various factors which were beyond the control of the Respondents they could not fulfill the export obligations. However it has been submitted that the appellants actually commenced commercial production and they supplied the goods to the other exporters in India. In these circumstances, we do not agree with the Revenue that the Respondents are not entitled for the exemption Notification. The Respondents are willing to pay duty on the capital goods imported duty free on the depreciated value. This point has been appreciated by the Commissioner (Appeals). Moreover the Notification itself provides depreciation from the date o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
