9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tput Norms (SION) for the export products. Hence DGFT had issued the advance authorizations as per the adhoc norms on the condition that the appellant would pay duty and interest on the utilized raw materials / inputs, imported over and above the finally approved norms. DGFT authorities subsequently fixed special norms and communicated the same to the appellant. The appellant vide their letter dt. 2.5.2005 requested the DGFT for clubbing of advance licences and export obligation discharge in respect of some of the advance licences, which was rejected by the DGFT. In this background, it appeared to the department that customs duty forgone on that quantity of excess inputs quantified on pro-rata basis valued at Rs. 1,34,71,080/-, amounting to Rs. 55,56,183/- along with interest liability thereon is payable by the appellant. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated by way of SCN dt. 3.10.2007, inter alia proposing confiscation of the alleged excess inputs, demand of customs duty forgone and the imposition of penalty on the appellant under Customs Act. The SCN also proposed denial of benefit of Exemption Notification No.43/2002-Cus. dt. 19.4.2002 and appropriation of amount of Rs. 10,90 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unutilized imports. In the appellant's case, there is no availability of the utilized inputs, as all these raw materials were consumed in the manufacture of final products. As stated supra originally more raw materials were consumed per unit of final products as compared to later stages of production. Hence the consumption was more than the final norms. The JDGFT/DGFT cannot reject their application for clubbing and considering these facts, DRI in all fairness collected the differential duty and interest, only on the excess raw materials, arrived at after clubbing these Advance Authorisation. (iii) Appellants were continuously following up their request for clubbing of the advance licenses with JDGFT, Hyderabad. On 25.09.2008, the appellants had written a detailed letter to the DGFT/JDGFT to consider the request for clubbing of the Advance Authorisation, particularly keeping in view the transitional provisions under para 4.28 of the Handbook of Procedure Vol-I read with para 4.20 of Handbook of Procedure Vol I (2008 - 09). (iv) Considering the appellant's request and on verification payment of differential duty and interest with Customs and on collection of compositio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of SCN dt. 03.10.2007, the request made by the appellant to the DGFT to consider clubbing of advance authorizations to enable payment of duty and interest on the net excess raw material utilized after clubbing was still pending. No doubt, the DGFT had initially vide letter dt.08.06.2006/13.06.2006 had rejected the request of the appellant to consider for clubbing of the licences. However, appellant had once again requested the DGFT vide letter dt. 05.02.2007 to reconsider their request. Yet another letter was sent by them to the DGFT on 14.03.2017. 6.2 The SCN has listed out, in the annexures thereto, details of imports bill of entry wise under each of the advance authorizations in Worksheet- I (pages 75-77 of the appeal book). So also, Worksheet-II (page 78-83 of the appeal book) contains list of shipping bills and the relevant advance authorizations. Worksheet-III (pages 84-85 of the appeal) is a consolidation of the item wise imports under various advance authorisations. 6.3 We find that vide a letter dt. 19.05.2011 the DGFT have conveyed that export obligation against advance licences have been clubbed in terms of para 4.20.3 and regularized in terms of para 4.28 of Hand Book ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have to be calculated as the net excess quantity after clubbing of the advance authorizations. Appellant further contends that based on their own working, even at the stage of DRI investigation, they have paid up an amount of Rs. 10,90,969/- towards duty forgone on such net excess quantity arrived at and further had also paid up an amount of Rs. 5,44,482/- towards interest liability thereon. 6.7 There is considerable merit in this ground of appeal put forth by the appellant, especially when viewed in the context of the letters of DGFT, discussed above, conveying permission for clubbing of licences and regularization of export obligation. Only in the interest of expediting decision in this appeal, and only based on the request made by the departmental representatives themselves, was a request made by this Bench on 05.10.2016 to the concerned Commissioner for causing verification of these averments. Surely that did not involve any complicated procedural and protracted procedural impediments to cause ascertainment requested for. All that was required to confirm the veracity of copies of the letters submitted by the appellant as having been issued by the DGFT. In case, once the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
