2017 (8) TMI 203

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER Per : C J Mathew The issue for resolution in these appeals lies within the narrow compass of whether an advance license holder, who having fulfilled the prescribed export obligation and transfers the license, can be held to be liable for recovery of the duty foregone on imports effected by the transferee for alleged breach of condition in the exemption not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al against the failure on the part of the adjudicating authority to confiscate the imported goods. 3. Briefly stated, M/s Ring Gears India Ltd was issued with advance licence no. PL/2147691 dated 17th August 1994 under the Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate (DEEC) scheme of the Foreign Trade Policy for import of non-alloy steel rounds/billets/ rolled sections to manufacture and export 100 ton .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. The demand and penalty are reconfirmed in the order impugned before us. We have heard Learned Authorised Representative and, as M/s Ring Gears India Ltd was unrepresented, have perused their appeal. 5. The scheme of duty free import as quid pro quo for fulfilment of export obligation is implemented through notification no. 203/92-Cus which permits duty free imports of raw materials by advance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not tenable. Furthermore, the impugned order has failed to substantiate the allegation of availment of credit. Such availment was in the realm of the possible had the inputs been sourced from a manufacturer; even that fundamental evidence of such procurement has not been brought on record. Hence, the alleged breach of condition of import appears to be a presumption which is not a valid ground fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndorsement of transferability would have ascertained conformity with condition in the exemption notification. As the goods could not have been held to be liable to confiscation, there is no justification for imposition of penalty under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. Appeal of Revenue also fails on this count. 8. In view of the above, the impugned order is not sustainable and is set aside. Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X