9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on dumb barge namely Bhageeratha-V, which had taken berth at Kaula Bunder, Darukhana and the said goods were to be illegally diverted to the local market without paying the Custom duty, department initiated investigation into the matter and detained the goods. On request of Importer the goods were released provisionally. Investigation further revealed that no prior permission was obtained for loading the duty free goods on barge, only intimation was given on 20.07.2012 that also after loading the goods in the barge and after survey of goods was conducted on barge. The Investigation also revealed that after provisional release of the goods, part of the imported goods valued at Rs. 1,05,29,116/- involving duty amount of Rs. 28,38,183 were neither used in the B-193, Sub-sea Pipe Line & B-193 Process Platform project nor any sanction of proper officer of Customs for non-observance of the condition under which the goods had been exempted from payment of duty was sought by Appellant. The said exemption was available for the goods to be used in connection with the purposes of off-shore oil exploration or exploitation. After completion of the specified project of M/s ONGC, the surplus good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decided the matter vide final order No. A/11324/2015 dtd. 15.09.2015 in their favour. 5. On the other hand, Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order and argued that the denial of exemption in the present case is of those goods which have not been used at B-19, Sub-Sea Pipe Line & B193, process platform projects of ONGC. It is on record that goods under dispute is surplus goods. There has been no permission from Mundra Customs or Directorate General of Hydrocarbons, Noida, to use the surplus quantity in another project. He also submits that in the instant case it has been admitted by the Appellant as well as other people in un retracted statement that the surplus cargo was/could not be used for the intended purpose, the surplus cargo was moved without the knowledge of ONGC, without any prior permission from any authority, thereby it seems that Appellant indulged in mischief, otherwise prohibited and was outside the preview of contract entered between the Appellant and ONGC. at B-193, Sub-Sea Pipe Line & B-193. 6. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that in Appellant's own ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Test Equipment Pvt. Ltd. [2003 (159) E.L.T. 665 (Tri.-Chennai)] the Tribunal has held in the context of Notification No. 56/88 granting exemption to goods required for use of testing of LSI/VLSI, etc. that "On my careful consideration of the submissions, as well as the findings recorded by learned Commissioner, I am of the considered opinion that the finding recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) is just, proper and legal and does not require any interference at our hands. There is no word "used for manufacture" in the exemption notification. On plain reading of the notification, the exemption is available to the item and it is required for manufacture of goods falling under chapter heading 85.42, namely, Electronic integrated circuits and Micro-assemblies. There is no indication in the notification for production of any end-use certificate. If the item is required for manufacture of goods falling under chapter heading 85.42, then the benefit is required to be extended. In this regard, the assessee's contention is that the item being LSI/VLSI tester, it is eligible for the benefit of the concession as the said item is required for the manufacture of goods falling under chapter he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chapter 84 or Chapter 85 or Chapter 90 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and are required for the manufacture of goods, falling under heading No. 85.42 of the said First Schedule. The certificate produced from M/s. Electronic Corporation of India Ltd. clearly indicates that the item is required for manufacture of goods in question which falls under chapter heading 85.42. In that view of the matter, the Commissioner's order granting benefit on the simple reading of the notification is justified and correct and there is no infirmity in the same. There is no merit in this appeal and it is rejected." 8. The above view recorded by ld. Member (Judicial), who disagreed with the order recorded by ld. Member (Technical) that the benefit of the notification was not available to the respondents, has been concurred with by third member, and by majority order, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. The Tribunal held that the expression "for use" is on a higher footing than the expression "required for use, and in the absence of the expression "specifically used for manufacture", has extended the benefit of Notification No. 57/88 to LSI/VSLI tes. equipments falling under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
