9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls Limited, formerly known as Gupta Carpet Udyog Limited (for short, "GCUL"), a 100% EOU, the petitioners supplied Polyester Filament Yarn (PTY/PFY) from time to time to GCUL. Pursuant to the intelligence received, the Central Excise conducted searches at the premises of certain 100% EOU. Show cause notice was issued to the petitioners' Silvassa Unit and GCUL, Gurgaon. It was, inter alia, alleged in the said show cause notice dated 13-6-2000 that the petitioners as consignors removed PTY/PFY to the GCUL against CT-3 certificate obtained by them. But, the same did not reach the premises of the consignee and were sold in local market by the consignee with the assistance of the petitioners. It was further stated in the show cause notice that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t 2 stating that respondent 1 had in an identical matter granted unconditional stay to the assessee. On 13-12-2007, respondent 2 rejected the modification application of the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 1056 of 2008 [2008 (226) E.L.T. 45 (Bom.)] in this court. On 15-2-2008, this court set aside the order dated 13-12-2007 and directed respondent 2 to rehear the modification application filed by the petitioners. 6. On 27-10-2008, respondent 2 rejected the modification application filed by the petitioners on the ground that no case was made out by the petitioners to modify the earlier order. However, respondent 2 extended the time for pre-deposit of amount of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- by a fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y were sold in open market. Admittedly, in the case of consignee - M/s. S.R. Industries, who had obtained goods under CT-3 certificate from the petitioners and others and, in the case of M/s. Riba Textiles Limited where goods were supplied by the petitioners, duty was demanded from the consignees. Demand was confirmed in the hands of the consignees. No appeal was preferred by the revenue. In spite of this, in this case, duty is claimed from the petitioners, who are consignors. In the circumstances, we are of the prima facie opinion that the petitioners are entitled to unconditional waiver especially when the Tribunal has granted unconditional waiver in the case of M/s. S.R. Industries. 9. In the circumstances, pre-deposit order dated 16-7- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
