Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (11) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ds were still in the bonded warehouse. Further I find that the claim for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 has not been considered at all since the impugned order gives finding beyond the scope of the proceedings. It is also a fact that the goods are still in the bonded warehouse only and the appellant s unit will continue to be an EOU. The perusal of the orders of the lower authorities does not allege that the appellant had not fulfilled the export obligation and accordingly, the ratio in the Saint Gobin Crystals of this Bench squarely applies - Moreover, the Notification No.52 ibid as amended by Notification Nos. 30 and 34 ibid clearly prescribe vide new Condition No.8, that no duty shall be leviable if raw material is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the CESTAT has jurisdiction. He also draws attention to the Miscellaneous Order No.20284 in the appellant s case dated 03.09.2021 wherein, the Division Bench of this CESTAT has after examination of records, directed the Registry to list the appeals before the Single Member Bench. It is therefore, clear that by the pleadings of the learned Advocate as well as the Miscellaneous Order, the Single Member Bench of the CESTAT has been conferred with the jurisdiction to dispose of these appeals. 3. Brief facts leading to the present dispute, inter alia, are that the appellant is a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU); that the appellant had procured raw materials/inputs for the purpose of manufacture and export of its final products; that the impor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondent, have gone through the documents placed on record as well as the decisions/orders relied upon during the course of arguments. 6. The import of duty-free raw materials was made with a purpose to manufacture and export the final products. It is the case of the appellant that both the Notifications in question, viz., Notification No. 52/2003 ibid and Notification No.22/2003 ibid were amended vide Notification Nos. 34/2015 and 30/2015 both dated 25.05.2015, wherein Condition No.8 of the Notification No.52 ibid was substituted by new Condition No. 8, which reads as under: (8) Subject to the satisfaction of the said officer, duty shall not be leviable in respect of capital goods, raw material, consumables, spares, goods man .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thorities. He also relied on an order of this very Bench in the case of Axa Business Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs CC, Bangalore, 2017 (10) TMI 763- CESTAT BANGALORE . In the said decision of Axa Business, the facts are slightly different inasmuch as there was transfer of certain goods to the other unit without intimation to the Revenue and that there was order of confiscation and in lieu of that thereof a redemption fine was also offered. The facts in the cases on hand are different and hence the ratio of above decision is not applicable. 9. After going through the orders of lower authorities and other judicial pronouncements, I find that an almost identical issue has been decided by this very Bench in the case of Saint Gobin Crystals (supra) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted to the appellant had been renewed and the goods were still in the bonded warehouse. Further I find that the claim for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 has not been considered at all since the impugned order gives finding beyond the scope of the proceedings. It is also a fact that the goods are still in the bonded warehouse only and the appellant s unit will continue to be an EOU. It is well settled law that no duty is payable when the goods are in the bonded warehouse. Further I find that both the authorities have not considered the provisions of Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 which by Para 6.15(b) allows the appellant for destruction of the goods under intimation to the Department. In view of these infirmities, I am of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates