9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its has decided to allow extension of warehousing of all the capital goods installed or put into use, simultaneously at the time of renewal of warehousing licences irrespective of the fact that the capital goods are due for extension or not. The period of extension would be allowed for such a period so that the capital goods need further extension only on the date of renewal of warehousing license. The period of extension, therefore may be adjusted accordingly for every piece of capital goods. However the maximum period of extension at a time would not be allowed for a period for more than five years - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Customs Act, 1962 read with provisions of Notification No. 140/91-Cus dated 22.10.91, as amended inasmuch as the said capital goods are deemed to have been removed as contemplated in Section 72 ibid and by following the principles of natural justice, the issue was adjudicated by the lower authority confiscating the said goods valued at ₹ 1,65,71,801/- (Rupees One Crore Sixty Five Lakhs Seventy One Thousand Eight Hundred and One only) with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) and appropriated the duty amount of ₹ 57,63,684/- (Rupees Fifty Seven Lakhs Sixty Three Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty Four only) together with interest of ₹ 1,86,765/- (Rupees One Lakh Eight ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l goods installed or put into use which is allowed simultaneously with the renewal of warehousing licence. He further submitted that the Circulars issued by the Board are binding on the Departmental Officer and for this he relied upon the following decisions: a) Ranadey Micronutrients Vs. CCE [1996 (87) E.L.T. 19] b) Paper Products Ltd. Vs. CCE [1999 (112) ELT 765] c) CCE Vs. Jayant Dalal Pvt. Ltd. [1997 (10) SCC 402] d) Bajaj Auto Ltd. vs. CCE [1996 (88) ELT 355] e) Prakash Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. B. Sen [1979 (4) ELT J 241] f) Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI [1991 (51) ELT 185] g) Pratibha Processors Vs. UOI [1996 (88) ELT 12] 4. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
