9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 727X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d held that a reading of the aforesaid notification clearly manifests that it is not necessary that the material which is imported into India has to be used in the manufacture of articles which are to be exported out of India. Even if the said material is used for the purpose of manufacture of articles or for being used in connection with the production or packaging or job work , the same shall still be covered by the aforesaid notification and thus would not attract any customs duty. Non-speaking order - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- We have considered the submission of the learned counsel that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and that the same has been passed in gross violation of the principle of natural ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r export of goods by a 100% Eou, approved by the board of Approvals, subject to conditions? 2. The facts of the Appeal in brief are as follows. The Appellants, an 100% EOU, had imported an Elevator on 1.10.2001 valued at ₹ 5,91,365/- duty free by availing the benefit of Notification No. 53/97-Cus. as amended. Since according to the department, the said Elevator was not used in the manufacture of export goods and therefore denying the benefit of the aforesaid exemption notification, a show cause notice dated 15.10.2004 was issued as to why the duty of ₹ 3,00,551/- be not recovered in terms of Notification No. 53/97- Cus. together with interest and penalty under the provisions of Section 117 of the Customs Act, 196 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He also submitted that even if it is not held to be a capital good, still the Appellants are entitled for the exemption notification aforesaid, as the import of the elevator in question has been approved by the Board of Approval. He referred to the communication dated 3.1.2005 received by the Appellants from the office of the Development Commissioner, SEEPZ SEZ, Ministry of Commerce Industry, Mumbai. He also brought to our notice that thereafter on 5.9.2005 in the Meeting of the Combined Board of Approvals for EOU/SEZ Schemes under the chairmanship of the Additional Secretary, Ministry of Commerce Industry, New Delhi, the Board decided to approve the duty free import of the Elevator, subject to Development Commissioner SEEPZ SEZ certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the normal period of limitation. According to learned counsel since there was no allegation of any suppression of facts or mis-statement in the show cause notice therefore the same is liable to be quashed on this ground alone. Per contra, the learned Authorised Representative reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of appeal filed by the Appellant. 4. In order to appreciate the issues involved, we have gone through the Notification No.53/97-cus.dated 3.6.1997. The said notification allows exemption on goods imported by EOUs. The relevant portion of the said notification, as amended, is reproduced as under:- Exemption to specified goods imported for production of good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Serial No. Description of goods (1) (2) 1. Capital goods. . . 4. Material handling equipments, namely, forklifts, overhead Cranes, mobile cranes, crawler cranes, hoists and Stackers. 17. Any other item required in relation to production of export Goods with the prior approval of the Board of Appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration the certificate dated 29.10.2001 issued by the office of the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai mentioning the model number of the Elevator in question on it, on the basis of which the appellant effected duty free import of the elevator. According to us it is very vital point in view of decision in the matter of GE India Technology Centre (supra) as cited by the learned counsel since it goes to the root of the matter. So far as the extended period is concerned, we have gone through the letter/show cause notice dated 15.10.2004 and found that it nowhere used the word suppression or mis-statement but only mentioned that the concession availed is irregular. But this submission has been casually brushed aside by the learned com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
