9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities have denied the change of the notification only on relying upon the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA VERSUS INDIAN RAYON INDUSTRIES LTD. [ 2008 (7) TMI 401 - SUPREME COURT] . Now the facts of the case in Indian Rayon Industries Ltd. is examined - From the observation of the Hon ble Supreme Court, it can be seen that the claim of the appellant to the extent the benefit of notification 94/1996-CUS was declined for the reason that the bill of entries involved in that case were dated 12.08.1998 and 28.05.1998 whereas in the present cases the bills of entry are dated 29.01.2014. During the relevant period of filing the bill of entry in the present case, the Notification No. 94/1996-Cus was very much available to the appellant in terms of amendment Notification No. 135/99-Cus dated 27.12.1999 whereby an entry as Sr. No. 2A was inserted. Whereas in the case of Indian Rayon, the date of bill of entries being 12.08.1998 and 29.05.1998 i.e. prior to the amendment in the Notification dated 27.12.1999. The facts are totally different, hence the reliance on the judgment in the case of India Rayon Industries by both the lower authorities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he impugned order rejected the appeal of the appellant only on the reliance of the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Customs Calcutta Vs. Indian Rayon Industries Ltd. 2008 (229) ELT 3 (SC), therefore, the present appeal filed by the appellant. 2. Shri M Balagopal, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the fact of the present case is different from the fact in the case of Indian Rayon Industries Ltd decided by the Hon ble Apex Court. Therefore, the sole reliance of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the judgment of Indian Rayon Industries Ltd (supra) is incorrect. Consequently, the order is also illegal and improper. 2.1 He submits that since, the appellant could not comply the condition of Notification No. 158/95-CUS they have claimed alternate exemption Notification by filing application under Section 149. He submits that at the time of filing bill of entry the alternate Notification No. 94/2006-Cus was very much available. Therefore, claiming a beneficial notification cannot be denied. He placed reliance on the following Judgments:- Birla NGK Insulators Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of CUS. Ahmedabad- 2009 (240) ELT 380 (Tri.-Ahmd.) Birla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of goods. If goods were imported into India after exportation therefrom, such goods shall be liable to duty and be subjected to all the conditions and restrictions, if any, to which goods of the like kind and value are liable or subject, on the importation thereof. 11. By Notification No. 158/95-Cus. dated 14th November, 1995, goods manufactured in India and reimported in India for repairs or for reconditioning are exempted from whole of the duty of customs leviable on them as well as additional duty subject to the condition, inter alia, that the goods are re-exported within six months of the date of re-importation or any extended period as may be allowed and a bond is executed at the time of importation to export within the said period and, in the event of failure to do so, pay an amount equal to the difference between the duty levied at the time of re-import and the duty leviable on suchgoods at the time of importation. The assessee executed a bond with the President of India, complying with the aforesaid condition of notification and undertook to pay, on demand in the event of its failure to comply with any of the conditions of notification, an amount equal to the difference bet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g conditions Applicable for such Goods (I) DEEC book has not been finally closed and export in question is delogged from DEEC book. (II) (II)In case of EPCG scheme the period of full export performance has not expired and necessary endorsements regarding reimport have been made. (III) (III)The importer had intimated the details of the consignment re-imported to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise in charge of the factory where the goods were 2. XXX XXX 3. XXX XXX refers to the goods exported under DEEC or Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) Scheme and not under DEPB Scheme. In the present case, out of the three Bills of Entry covering goods which had to be reexported, only one of them was for goods earlier exported under DEEC scheme while the other two were under DEPB scheme. The adjudicating authority had, in respect of goods initially imported under DEEC Scheme, given the benefit of the Notification No. 94/96-Cus, while rejecting the claim in respect of the goods exported under a DEPB Scheme. This is in accordance with the language of Notification No. 94/96-Cus. The difference between DEEC and DEPB Schemes can be seen from the following :- DEEC Scheme Under this scheme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the manufacture in bond of export goods, may be permitted by the Commissioner of Central Excise; (c) allow removal of excisable material without payment of duty for the manufacture of export goods, as may be specified, to be exported in execution of one or more export orders; or for replenishment of duty paid materials used in the manufacture of such export goods already exported for the execution of such orders, or both; subject to such safeguards, conditions and limitations as regards the class or description of goods, class or description of materials used for manufacture thereof, destination, mode of transport and other allied matters as may be specified in the notification which the exporter undertakes to abide by entering into a bond in the proper form with such surety or sufficient security, and under such conditions as the Commissioner approves. (2) The Central Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, permit export of specified excisable goods in bond, without payment of duty from a factory of manufacture or warehouse, to Nepal or Bhutan, subject to such conditions or limitations as regards the class of goods, destination, mode of trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
