9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (9) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstitution of India, the petitioner Company is challenging notice of demand dated April 20, 1979 served by the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise, Century Rayon Range, Shahad, Dist. Thane. The facts giving rise to service of this notice are not in dispute and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner Company. 2. The petitioner Company runs a facto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, 1975. The notification was amended on April 27, 1978, but the amendment does not take away the exemption granted earlier. In view of the exemption notification at the time of import the Company did not pay any customs duty or additional duty. 3. The Company cleared a part of the imported material between March 1, 1979 and April 20, 1979 from the bonded warehouse. The Superintendent of Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the demand notice issued by the Superintendent is entirely illegal and the assumption of the Superintendent that the wood pulp was imported only on the date when it was cleared from the customs bonded warehouse is incorrect. The submission is correct and deserves acceptance. It is not in dispute that the wood pulp was imported by the Company between February 1978 and February 1979, that is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is contrary to law and cannot be sustained. 5. Accordingly, rule is made absolute and the demand notice dated April 20, 1979, copy of which is annexed as Exhibit 'C' to the petition, is quashed. The Company had cleared the remaining imported goods from the bonded warehouse during the pendency of the petition on furnishing bank guarantee in respect of demanded duty. The bank guarantee would now s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
