9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant established a 100% EOU at Bhiwadi for the manufacture and export of tissue culture plants. The private bonded warehouse was licensed for manufacture in terms of customs notification No. 13/81-Cus dated 09/02/1981. This notification was succeeded by notification No. 53/97-Cus dated 03/06/1997. On account of failure to carry on their business, their factory had to be shut down and they approached Development Commissioner in February 1997 for de-bonding of the unit. They further approached the Assistant Commissioner for working out and payment of the customs duties. In the 1st round of litigation, Commissioner passed the order dated 02/12/1999 in which the customs duty was demanded on the capital goods originally imported duty-free fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant argued that they will be entitled for depreciation. In support thereof they cited the following case laws wherein depreciation has been allowed while the de-bonding export oriented units : (i) Khabros Steel India Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur reported in 2006 (194) E.L.T. 117 (Tri, - Del.); (ii) Anjaleem Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs, CCE & CUS, Vadodara reported in 2007 (210) E.L.T. 204 (Tri.-Ahmd,); (iii) CC, Chandigarh vs. Advance Components Engg. reported in 2014 - TIOL - 1322 - CESTAT - DEL.; (iv) Kumar Housing Corporation Ltd, vs. CCE, Pune-III reported in 2014 - TIOL - 2887 - CESTAT MUM (v) Shiva Analyticals (India) Limited, Bangalore vs. The Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore reported in 2007 TIOL - 2187- CESTAT BANG and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the unit was closed and was no longer in a position to undertake any manufacture and export of their goods. The notification No. 13/81- customs was replaced by the successor notification No. 53/87 customs dated 3rd of June 1997. This notification deals with the disposal of capital goods imported for setting up of the unit in clause 5. The said clause 5 is reproduced below: "where it is shown to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs that the said unit has been allowed by the Development Commissioner or the said Board to clear any of the said goods for being taken to any other place in India in accordance with the export and import policy. (a) Such clearance of capital goods, material handling equipment, office equipment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97, it is seen that the capital goods at the time of clearance will be entitled to payment of customs duty on depredated value provided that the said unit has been allowed by the Development Commissioner to clear such goods in DTA. In the present case we find that the unit commenced its production in the year 1994. The appellant has approached the Development Commissioner for de-bonding of the unit as early as 4th of February 1997. The adjudication order passed by the Commissioner originally, demanding customs duty on capital goods was passed in the year 1999. However as we have noted in the earlier paragraphs, this order was received by the appellant only in the year 2011. As per the directions of the Tribunal in the 1st round of litigatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
