TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inted out that when the Norms have been fixed in the month of October, there cannot be any demand for the period prior to 3.10.2006, the date when the Norms were fixed by the DGFT Committee. When the appellant has already paid the duty of Central Excise on the scrap arising out of the manufacturing process under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, there is no justification for demanding Customs Duty on the raw material which they say has been consumed in excess of SION and has gone into the scrap on which duty of Central Excise has been paid by the appellant. The Department is demanding Customs duty under Section 72, whereas there is no proof that the appellant improperly removed the goods from their 100% EOU. Considering the ratio o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant had approached office of JDGFT, New Delhi with a request to fix Standard Input Output Norms (SION). (iv) On the appellant s request, the Department allowed the appellant to clear the scrap generated on payment of duty on scrap value after obtaining Bank Guarantee and undertaking letter to the effect that the appellant would pay differential duty payable, if any, after fixation of SION. (v) The Department later found that percentage of scrap generated and cleared is more than SION. The Department therefore, issued show-cause notice (SCN) to the appellant. (vi) This SCN was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original No.04/2008 dated 31.3.2008 confirming the duty liability of ₹ 26,37,569/- on the excess raw material co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d involved is from April 2005 to January 2007, whereas SION have been fixed by the DGFT Committee only on 3.10.2006. In the present case, thus at the most SION fixed could be made applicable only for about four-month period. In the present case, the appellant has paid the duty on the scrap which has been found in excess of Norms fixed. It is pointed out that when the Norms have been fixed in the month of October, there cannot be any demand for the period prior to 3.10.2006, the date when the Norms were fixed by the DGFT Committee. 6.1 Further, when the appellant has already paid the duty of Central Excise on the scrap arising out of the manufacturing process under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, there is no justification for demandi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CE, Surat vs. Goyal Synthetics: 2015 (323) ELT 150 (Tri.-Ahmd.) has observed as under: 5. As regards the Department s appeal relating to the demand of duty on the inputs, which have gone into manufacture of waste and rejects, he submits that the goods have been cleared in violation of Section 72(d) of the Customs Act read with Section 59. On going through the provisions of Section 72, it is noticed that the same relates to the goods improperly removed from the warehouse and such provisions will be attracted only in respect of goods, which have been bonded. In this case, the bonded goods namely, the raw materials were not found cleared unauthorizedly or in contravention of the Customs Act. On the other hand, we find that the raw materia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|