9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under CTH 29420090 and duty @5% + nil CVD were paid and the goods cleared. It appeared that the said goods viz. Amiodarone Hcl would fall under Sl.No.80(B) of the said notification and not 80(A) thereof, but the importers had not claimed or complied with the condition of 80(B) in that they had not fulfilled the conditions of Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods), Rules, 1996 (for short, IGCRDMEG Rules). It therefore appeared that the importers were not eligible for the notification benefit as above, hence, the importers were called upon to show cause to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs as to why benefit of Notification 21/2002 Sl. No 80(B) should not be denied and duty charged at the rat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds cleared under Bill of Entry No.519862 dated 01.04.2003 kgs. of in the manufacture of Eurythmic tablets and injections in the year 2003-04. For obtaining the benefit of classification and assessment under SI.No.80(B) of the Notification No.21/2002 the appellant had to follow the Rules and the imported goods had to be used in the manufacture of drugs or medicines specified in List No.3 appended in the Notification. Before the respondent the appellant had also produced a consumption certificate issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Food and Drugs Control Administration, certifying that the imported materials had been used in the manufacture of Eurythmic (Amiodarone Hcl) injections and tablets. Appellants also had been importing Amiodarone H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods, namely - (A) Drugs or medicines specified in List 3 (B) Bulk drugs used in the Manufacture of the drugs or Medicines at (A) above 5% 5% - - - 5 4.4 From the above it is evident that there is no post-import condition for Sl.No.80(A). The requirement of following procedure laid down in IGCRDMEG Rules comes into the picture only when the goods are imported under claim of benefit under Sl.No.80(B). The appellant has a point that when the goods had been imported with initial claim of benefit under Sl.No.80(A), there would not have been any inkling of the requirement of the said rules. For this reason itself, appellant cannot be faulted for not having taken correct registration and filed declaration as provided for in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ended purpose. There is also no allegation that the goods have been otherwise diverted for some other purpose. The certificate of the jurisdictional Superintendent has also attested the usage of the imported goods. The purpose of the IGCRDMEG Rules is to ensure mandate of the import and its manufacture and its subsequent processing etc. without obviating commission of fraud etc. There is no such allegation here. The usage of the imported goods have been sufficiently established which, in our view, would be sufficient compliance of the condition of the notification. In the event, the impugned order holding to the contrary cannot be sustained and will have to be set aside, which we hereby do. 5. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
