9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t would appear that the original holder exported goods using domestically procured inputs and transferred the unutilised portion to respondent - respondent was neither the manufacturer nor the exporter, the manner in which export obligation was fulfilled, and more particularly, the compliance with conditions thereof, would, in the normal course be not within their knowledge. It would appear tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The show cause notice was issued to the respondent on 29 th January 1999 for recovery of duty of ₹ 10,23,510/- that was foregone on import of goods vide four bills of entry nos. 2926 dated 6 th January 1994, 11072 dated 31 st January 1994, 11073 dated 31 st January 1994 and 11074 dated 31 st January 1994 by availment of exemption no. 203/92-Cus dated 19 th May 1992 against transferre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n fulfilled by the original holder and utilised it for import of goods free of duty. It would appear that the original holder exported goods using domestically procured inputs and transferred the unutilised portion to respondent as permitted in the said notification and the Foreign Trade Policy notified by the Director General of Foreign Trade under the Foreign Trade (Development Regulation) Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lized based on surmises and assumptions that such credit had been availed on the inputs without any evidence of it being placed before the reviewing authority. 9. In Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Bombay v. Hico Enterprises [2008 (228) ELT 161 (SC)] , the scope of invoking the recovery provisions against transferee of advance licence is explicitly laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. In this appeal challenge is to the aforesaid conclusions. Learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that no role was ascribed to it in the show cause notice. 7. It is seen that in view of the fact that in the show cause notice issued on 4-3-1999., there was no reference to the alleged infraction of M/s. Amar Taran Exports, the transferor of the license in question, the judgment of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
