9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was issued to them on 22.06.2004 followed by an addendum/corrigendum dated 05.11.2004 demanding duty and confiscating goods and imposing of penalty. The demand of duty was confirmed by the lower Authorities on the ground that they have imported base paper containing design/colour under the DEEC licence. It was held by the lower Authorities that the appellant had imported superior quality in base paper either in design or in colour while their export product was manufactured using base paper. It was alleged that no nexus in the imported goods and exported goods. The demand was confirmed by the Original Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 25.11.2004. The matter was filed by the Revenue before Commissioner (Appeals) who vide order dated 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctly those used in the export product but provided the inputs are commercially known to be useable in the product exported. 4. Learned AR relied on the impugned order. 5. We have gone through rival submissions, we find that the impugned order has been passed only on the ground that material use for export was white base paper whereas the material imported the paper was having design/colour. We find that Circular No. 39/97-Cus. dated 16.09.1997 clearly prescribed that it is not necessary that the goods imported should match exactly those used in the export product provided that the inputs are commercially known to be useable in the product exported. We also find that the Order-in-Original dated 23.06.2004 passed by the Adjudicating Authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aspect, guiding its commercial demand and not a technical characteristic. The whole dispute seems to revolve around the definition and scope of the word "material required" and "technical characteristics and quality" as appearing in the different notifications pertaining to the DEEC/Advance Licence Scheme. This has always been the matter of dispute in the field formations due to different interpretations of these words. As a result the trade as well as the officers have faced difficulties in implementation of the provisions of such notifications. This has also been the subject matter of many judicial pronouncements. The CBEC has also issued the guidelines and instructions on this matter from time to time. In this regard, the. reliance i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Circular No. 36/97 dated 16.9.97. In the said circular, it was clearly held that the correct interpretation of the word "raw material required for use" does not mean that raw material must be physically incorporated. It was also clarified with the help of examples that inputs may be allowed even if they are not exactly those used in the export product provided the inputs are commercially known to be useable in the product exported. These views also find echo in the various judicial pronouncements on the subject matter. The reliance may also be placed in the case of S.D. Bakhai & Co. V. C.C. Mumbai 2000(92)ECR 204(Tri.) where the Hon'ble CEGAT held that it is not necessary to establish the close nexus between the imported inputs and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
