9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this regard. Regarding the refund of duty on finished goods, cleared for DTA, the contention of the Revenue is that during the period between date on which no dues certificate issued by the Customs and date of final de-bonding order of the Development Commissioner, unit shall not entitled to claim any exemption for procurement of capital goods or inputs - Decided in favor of the assessee. - E/2894-2895/2006-(DB) - Final Order No. A/61092-61093/2016-EXDB][ - Dated:- 4-8-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri V.K. Trehan, AR for the appellant Shri Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate for the respondent ORDER These appeals by the Revenue are against the order dated 17.02.2006 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the respondent is eligible for refund of ₹ 20,678/- and ₹ 78,007/- on consumables and yarn out of imported cotton respectively. He also held that the benefit of Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated 31.3.2003 for clearance of yarn to DTA on the stock of 24.1.2005 and accordingly held that the respondent is eligible for refund of ₹ 6,07,043- and ₹ 18,666/- on the yarn and waste respectively. Aggrieved by this order, the Revenue is in appeal. 5. We have heard both sides and examined the appeal records. 6. Regarding refund of duty paid on indigenously procured machinery and spares, the Revenue contended that there is no exemption notification under Central Excise for providing effective rate of duty for EPCG sch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any exemption for procurement of capital goods or inputs. The respondent paid requisite duty on 24.1.2005 on finished goods lying in the stock and de-bonding was allowed after four days, as such the duty has been correctly paid by the respondent. It is seen that the respondents were given approval for de-bonding on 7.12.2004. The assessing officer, calculated the duty on the basis of stock available and the respondents is liable to pay duty only at the time of final de-bonding. As such, we find no infirmity in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 8. Considering the discussion as above, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed. The Cross objections filed by the respondents were also disposed of. (Pronounced in the open co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
