9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 910X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding and the quantum of depreciation available at that time. Any assessment of quantification done prior to that date would only be a provisional assessment - the second order of the Dy. commissioner does not amount to review of the first order in so far as the first order was a conditional order and the appellants were entitled to depreciation till the date of debonding - appeal allowed - decide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Dy. commissioner dated 11.12.2006 wherein he ordered payment of customs duty amounting to, ₹ 59,25,058/- in cash on the goods involved in partial de-bonding of the unit. The order further recorded as follows: - (a) Erection of concrete wall in place of windows and doors existing between phase V and phase VI. (b) considering raw material godown, finished product godown, FFT Section, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2007 on the ground that the appellant had not challenged the order quantifying the amount to be paid on debonding dated 11.12.2006 and therefore, the said order had become final and Dy. Commissioner had no authority to review his own order. 2.2 Learned counsel argued that the order dated 11.12.2006 was a conditional order subject to fulfillment of condition 1 to 7 as mentioned in the said orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... risdictional customs and central Excise authorities. The appellants are entitled to depreciation til1 the date of debonding and in these circumstances, no assessment or quantification of duty liability can be made till the actual debonding. If any such duty quantification had been done, it can only be treated as provisional. 3. Learned AR relied on the impugned order. 4. We have gone through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was a conditional order and the appellants were entitled to depreciation till the date of debonding. In those circumstances, any quantification done prior to the date of debonding can only be a provisional assessment. 5. In these circumstances, we do not find any merit in the order of the commissioner (Appeals) that the second order of Dy. commissioner amounts to review of his own first order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
