9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 633X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir other factory and it was violation of the provisions of para 4.1 'of the EXIM Policy 1992-97 - Held that: - The appellant has produced a copy of the letter F. No.20/663/AM96ĆPCG-1/664 dated 14.10.99 from the office of Director General of Foreign Trade, Ministry of Commerce, Government of India, wherein the subject EPCG dated 15.03.1996 has been mentioned. This letter says that the appellant has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Order No.54950/2016 - Dated:- 15-11-2016 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President And Mr. Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical) Sh. Jayant Kumar, Advocate for the appellant Sh. K. Poddar, AR for the Respondent Per: Ashok K. Arya: 1. The appellant is in appeal against the order passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) whereunder order-in-original dated 11.12.2001, passed by Dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ported under EPCG were installed; the said exports were made from their other factory and it was violation of the provisions of para 4.1 'of the EXIM Policy 1992-97. The demand, therefore, is sustainable in law. 4. We have carefully considered the facts and the submission of both the sides. 4.1 The appellant has produced a copy of the letter F. No.20/663/AM96 PCG-1/664 dated 14.10.99 fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention that the goods were exported from their other factory has no significance. In other words when the Licencing Authority, which is the office of DGFT certifies that export obligation has been fulfilled, it is not for the Revenue to deny the benefit of the subject Notification No. 110/95-Cus (supra) unless Revenue is able to get specific clarification from DGFT that the goods exported fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
