9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Shri M.N. Bharathi, Advocate, Shri S.Ramachandran, Consultant, For the Appellant Ms.P.Hemavathi, Commissioner (AR), For the Respondent Per B. Ravichandran All these 22 appeals are on the common dispute with reference to CV Duty liability of imported cement by various parties. The appeals are by such importers as well as Custom House Agents (CHA) who processed the documents for import. Appeals by CHAs are only against penalties. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the importer-appellant imported Ordinary Port Land Cement Grade 43 (BIS approved) as per BS EN 197-1: 2000. The cement was imported in packaged form of 50 kgs. each. The importer-appellant/CHA filed Bills of Entry for clearing the said goods claiming CV duty concession in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med by the appellant and the importer and the same was allowed. Without any additional evidence contrary to the original assessment, the present proceedings were initiated. Even now, the department is confirming the differential duty only on the ground that the appellant-importer failed to produce the evidence of actual use. When the initial claim of actual use was accepted by the officers with no conditions put for further proof, now Revenue cannot take a stand that the appellant has failed to establish the actual use. d) The demand is contested on limitation also. As already noted, these imports were assessed based on the declarations made by the appellants claiming the said concession available to the actual user. In case of any doubt, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the law and the claim of limitation cannot be entertained. 5. We have heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. On the first issue we have perused the sample invoice and import documents. It is clear that Bills of Entry filed along with invoices contain details of goods imported. The exporters details with evidences linking up with high sea sale invoices further linked up with Bill of Entry. Hence, the import from the designated exporter who is declared as manufacturer of cement based on the details in the invoices cannot be disputed. No contrary evidence that purchase is from a trader has also been submitted by the Revenue. 7. Regarding the second issue of actual user condition for the imported cement, we note that the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion and analysis, we find that there is no merit in the impugned orders denying CV duty concession wherever available to the importer-appellants of such conditions. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and all the appeals are allowed with consequential reliefs, if any, as per law.
9. We note the penalties imposed on the CHA who only processed the import documents are not legally sustainable. For penalty to be imposed for abetting a violation by another person, intentional action has to be shown. No such evidence has been brought out. Accordingly, we hold the penalties imposed on CHAs are not sustainable The same are set aside.
10. All the appeals are allowed.
(dictated and pronounced in court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
