9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew days before the presenting on 27-2-99 of the Union Budget for the year 1999-2000. Those Bills of Entry were assessed and duty paid and out of charge order were also given by the Customs Officer prior to 27-2-99. However, the goods were physically removed from the warehouses subsequent to the Budget only. In the impugned orders, the Commissioner, Customs, Visakhapatnam has held that the rate of duty as applicable subsequent to 27-2-99 would be applicable in respect of the goods covered under the appellants' Bills of Entry inasmuch as the goods were physically cleared from the Bonded Warehouse subsequent to the coming into effect of the new rates of duty. The issue for decision in these appeals is whether this finding of the Commissioner i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EGAT in the case of Biecco Lawrie Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta reported in 2002 (139) E.L.T. 193 etc. It has been contended that these decisions make it clear that actual removal of the goods mentioned in sub-section (6) of Section 15(1) is not to be equated with physical removal of the goods in all cases. Instead, the completion of the condition for the clearance of goods from Bonded Warehouse should be treated as equivalent to actual removal. It has been submitted that once "out of charge" order is given, the goods are no more to be treated as warehoused goods. 5. As against the above submissions on behalf of the appellants, the Departmental Representative has pointed out that the language of Section 15(1)(b) stipulated tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seas (P) Ltd. that if the Bills of Entry were filed under Section 68 of the Customs Act and Customs Officer refused to allow release of the goods on an erroneous assumption, the revised rate of duty would not be applicable and the rate of duty applicable would be the rate on date of filing the ex-bond Bill of Entry. The decision of the CEGAT in Biecco Lawrie Ltd. also supports the view that once requirements under Section 68 are completed no further assessment is permissible on the ground that the goods were not physically removed before the coming into force of the revised rate of duty. The decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prakash Mills related to warehoused goods in respect of which only Bills of Entries were filed. Other require ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
