9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication of the straight-line depreciation approved by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, the value of capital goods would be nil. Consequently, no duty liability would arise. The nexus between the value of the goods imported and the applicable duties is a legacy of time gone by. On the date of initiating proceedings against the appellant, a different regime was in place and that regime relied upon the touchstone of net foreign exchange positive. Considering the value of imports effected by the appellant, that obligation stands fulfilled. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal Nos. C/289 & 491/2009 - a/85347-85348/2018 - Dated:- 20-2-2018 - Justice Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 462, with duty of ₹ 41,56,681 foregone in accordance with notification no. 13/81-Cus dated 9th February 1981, and had availed duty exemption of ₹ 1,06,242 on procurement of capital goods valued at ₹ 3,72,932 under notification no. 123/81-CE dated 2nd June 1981. It is these duties that were sought to be recovered for failure to fulfill the export obligation of ₹ 1950.67 lakhs for the period from 1992-93 to 2001-02 as the total exports was a mere ₹ 398.43 lakhs. The demand was confirmed with other penalties by Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Nagpur vide order-in-original no. 07/CUS/2008 dated 30th December 2008. 3. Heard Learned Counsel for appellant and Learned Authorized Representative. 4. The p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is scheme has altered substantially over the time that this dispute has persisted. The computation thereof, either applicable at the time of issue of Letter of Permission or applicable at the time of issuing of the show cause notice, varies substantially. It would appear that the impugned order has not distinguished between the two. A contention has been made on behalf of the appellant that the export obligation indicated in the Letter of Permission is a mere ₹ 416.30 lakhs over the ten years period from date of commencement of commercial production. It is also pointed out that they had applied for de-bonding on more than one occasion without any response. It is further contended that the action to recover duty is premature since the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise Vadodara v. Solitaire Machine Tools P Ltd [2003 (152) ELT 384 (Tri-Mumbai)] holding 6. Items like Jigs and fixtures are for repeat, long time use in manufacture. Therefore, they form part of the equipment used in production, as opposed to raw materials, parts etc. which are consumed in manufacture. Evidently, they qualify to be treated as capital goods. Further, these items were specifically figuring in the list of capital goods for import as approved by the authorities. In such circumstances, we are not able to find any merit in the objection raised by the Revenue authorities. With regard to the period of depreciation also the appellant is right in claiming depreciation upto March, 97. This is clear from the terms of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ications in vogue would apply. The impugned order has no observations or findings on this score. 11. Even after the restructuring of the scheme, the appellant would, under the obligation of net foreign exchange positive, have been eligible for de-bonding without payment of duty. The nexus between the value of the goods imported and the applicable duties is a legacy of time gone by. On the date of initiating proceedings against the appellant, a different regime was in place and that regime relied upon the touchstone of net foreign exchange positive. Considering the value of imports effected by the appellant, that obligation stands fulfilled. The impugned order had failed to take notice of this. 12. In view of the above, the confirmatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
