9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1962 read with Notification No. 126/94, dated 3-6-1994. There is a demand for interest under Section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962 and imposition of penalty of Rs. 17 lakhs under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. The duty amount demanded is the customs duty payable on about Rs. 3 crores worth flowers cleared to the domestic area during the period 1997-98 to 2001-2002. The contention of the appellant in the present appeal is that the findings in the order are entirely contrary to the settled law on the issue. It is pointed out that goods produced in an EOU are subject to central excise duty as applicable and not customs duty. The learned Counsel for the appellants also has pointed out that flowers are not excisable under the central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to the customs duty leviable on finished goods as if imported as such, for clearance of cut-flowers, which is not an excisable commodity. It has also been stated that the DTA units are not required to pay any duty for sale of cut-flowers, as the same are not excisable. This is stated to have placed the floriculture units in EOUs at a serious disadvantageous position vis-a-vis DTA units. 27. The matter has been examined. In the central excise notifications governing duty free procurement by EOUs and units under EPZ/STP/ETHP Schemes, there is a provision to recover duty on the inputs & consumables procured duty free under exemption notification, which have gone into production of non-excisable goods cleared into DTA. In the notifications g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise and Customs with regard to Notification No. 114/95 wherein it has been clarified that if the goods cleared from EOU to DTA is not excisable, then full Customs duty will be charged as if the said goods have been imported. Learned Consultant has replied to this by pointing out that this clarification is contrary to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Vikram Ispat v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III [2000 (120) E.L.T. 800] wherein the Tribunal had held that clearance of the goods by a 100% EOU to the domestic tariff area are not imports under the Customs Act, and being goods manufactured in India, those goods are also liable to central excise duty. The learned SDR also pointed out that the impugned proceedings have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
