9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being the amount of interest. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant was issued EPCG Authorisation License No.1030000611 dt. 04/08/2005 by Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (JDGFT), Cochin for import of goods at concessional rate of duty @ 5% in terms of the conditions specified under the Notification No.97/2004 Cus. dt. 17/09/2004. Total duty foregone as per the said licence was Rs. 23,83,155/- and the duty foregone as per assessment was Rs. 21,57,215/-. Since the appellant could not fulfil the export obligation within the stipulated time period, they requested the JDGFT for extension of the Export Obligation Period. The JDGFT, vide letter F.No.10/36/021/00041/AM.06/445 dt. 03/06/2016 directed the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d wrongly with composition fee is illegal and not sustainable. He further submitted that the appellant had submitted evidence regarding the redemption of the EPCG authorization before the appellate authority and also submitted that the appellant is even entitled for refund of 50% duty paid for getting extension of the Export Obligation period; but the appellate authority failed to consider the same and consider the payment of said 50% duty as demand under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 to confirm demand of interest on such duty. He also submitted that both the authorities have failed to appreciate that finalization of the export obligation issue is pending and goods are only provisionally released and on finalization of the issue after ver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... older to Customs authorities before an endorsement for extension is made on EPCG by RA concerned. This provision clearly states that only 50% of the duty is to be paid as a composition fee for not fulfilling the export obligation and seeking extension of the export obligation period. There is no mention in the Policy that this composition fee which is paid as a duty is to be paid along with interest. Further I find that this is not the duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 which is paid by the appellant because the final duty is yet to be assessed after verifying the document furnished by the appellant regarding the fulfillment of export obligation. Further I find that the Customs authorities should have sought clarification from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
