9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to movement of goods to and from zones cannot substitute for the statutory definitions. Recourse to penal provisions without clear understanding of legalities is the surest mode of reverting to arbitrariness and lawlessness that preceded the dawn of civilization. The activities of the units in the zones are also subject to review of annual performance by the legally constituted Approval Committee. It would be well-nigh impossible for the units to remove finished products or inputs without detection at the time of such annual review. And shortage or failure to account for inputs is visited by recovery of duty and other penal action in accordance with the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005. There are adequate safeguards in that Act without t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. 2. The proceedings were initiated consequent upon recovery of the gold pieces from Shri Abhishek Pareek who was found to be carrying them without valid documents while exiting from SEEPZ-Special Economic Zone, Andheri. The said person has had a daily entry pass for M/s Charisma Jewellery a unit with SEEPZ SEZ and a permanent entry pass issued as employee of M/s Diaster Jewellery Pvt Ltd. He produced a sale invoice issued by a unit situated outside SEZ which is a group company of M/s Charisma Jewellery. Consequent upon valuation the goods were seized as being attempted to be smuggled into domestic tariff area from SEEPZ SEZ in exercise of powers under Customs Act, 1962 read with SEZ Rules, 2006. 3. The original authority rendered hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cial Economic Zone, that evidence of ownership by M/s Starlet Jewel Pvt Ltd. had been presented to the adjudicating authority who chose to disregard the same, that documents related to manufacture by the special economic zone unit, M/s Charisma Jewellery Pvt Ltd. had been furnished as evidence that the seized goods had no connection with the unit in SEEPZ Special Economic Zone and that the Director cannot be held vicariously responsible for technical breaches by employees. Learned Counsel for appellant also placed on record show cause notice dated 21st May 2012 for the said violation issued by Development Commissioner, SEEPZ Special Economic Zone. 6. Learned Authorised Representative relied upon the contents of the order of the original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raw material would have been licitly cleared on payment of duty. By neglecting to verify the claims supported by documentation, the lower authorities have failed to perform a fundamental task implicit in the adjudication process. That, by itself, vitiates the proceedings. 9. There are situations that do allow the exercise of concurrent jurisdiction by two different statutory authorities without being mutually exclusive. However, the particular nature of the special economic zones provided the impetus for the considered wisdom of the supreme legislature to enact a law that was not only comprehensive and self-contained but also accorded to it an overriding status. Clearly the appellants cannot be subject to two jurisdictions, one of them ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the appointed day, be deemed to be territory outside the customs territory of India for the purposes of undertaking the authorized operations. Authorized operations under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 are the activities permitted to a Developer by the Board of Approvals or those permitted to units by the Approval Committee. For units, the activities revolve around manufacture of goods or rendering of service. As the manufactures of gold products are authorized operations of the appellant-unit, section 53 would exclude the jurisdiction of the Customs Act, 1962. 11. The original authority has placed reliance on section 53 (2) of Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 to invoke jurisdiction. That provision deeming zones to be cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but also has to be in the context of the scope of the statute which is sought to be invoked. section 111 and 112 can, undoubtedly, be invoked where laws other than Customs Act, 1962 have been contravened but only in relation to imports. The definition of import under section 2(23) the Customs Act, 1962 is restricted to with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions, means bringing into India from a place outside India. Notwithstanding the deemed status of being outside the Customs territory, zones are very much within the territory of India and the brining out of goods from a zone fails to meet the definition of import under Customs Act, 1962 and consequently fails the test of invoking the provisions of section 111 and 112. Even i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
