9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EOU scheme vide Letter of Approval dated 19.06.1998 for setting-up of a 100% EOU at Bhilwara, Rajasthan. The assessee-appellant applied for conversion of its EOU under EPCG scheme and was granted EPCG licence on 17.04.2008 under the prevailing EPCG scheme in terms of Paragraph 6.18 of the FTP 2004-09. At the time of de-bonding, the assessee-appellant calculated the duty payable on de-bonding. Upon enquiry into the facts that the payment of duties have already made by the assessee-appellant, the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner issued the no dues certificate dated 16/05/2008. On the basis of such certificate, the Development Commissioner issued final de-bonding letter dated 16/10/2008. Thereafter, the assessee-appellant had paid the duty o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of Rs. 18,36,448/- along with interest and penalty. Feeling aggrieved with the said impugned order, the assessee-appellant has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 1.4 Revenue has assailed the impugned order on the ground that calculation of depreciated value of capital goods for payment of duty at the time of de-bonding would be as per the Notification in force i.e. No.52/2003-Cus and the Notification No.53/97-Cus, which stands rescinded at the time of de-bonding of capital goods. 2. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the assessee-appellant submitted that the entire demand is barred by limitation of time, inasmuch as, upon verification books of accounts, the duty was assessed and no dues certificate was issued by the Deputy Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-appellant before the department at the time of de-bonding and on the basis of such documents, no dues certificate was issued by the Deputy Commissioner on 16/05/2008. Thus, it cannot be said that the facts of the assessee-appellant in context with de-bonding and payment of duties was not within the knowledge of the department. Hence, in such an eventuality, the show cause notice should have been issued within one year from the relevant date. In this case, since the same was issued beyond the period of one year, we are of the view that duty demand cannot be confirmed against the assessee-appellant on the ground of limitation alone. We find that this Tribunal in the case of Century Denim and Century Yarn (supra), on identical set of facts, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
