9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant for the harmonious functioning of the EOU Scheme. Taking of a restricted view by the Revenue authorities would make the scheme unworkable. Such a view also is not warranted as there is no material showing that the appellant had diverted any of the imported goods for any purpose other than use in the EOU premises. The appellant has also a strong case except for two machines, other machines remain installed and the duty demand in the case of installed machines is contrary legal provision The assessee had applied for extension of validity of the licence which was not considered in view of the fact that the Building/Plant machinery were not got insured by the assessee and the assessee was asked to do the needful it was only on 22-5-2000, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the appellant imported capital goods worth about Rs. 2.5 crores during June 1996 to April 1997 without payment of duty (approx. Rs. 1 crore) under Notification No. 13/81-Cus., dated 9-2-1981 read with Notification No. 53/1997-Cus., dated 3-6-1997. 3. The appellant's project implementation did not progress. Therefore, it kept on applying for extension of time. 4. Under the impugned order, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur in whose jurisdiction the manufacturing unit is located, confiscated the imported machinery, imposed penalty on the appellant and demanded duty forgone on the machinery. The ground for doing the same is that in terms of the exemption Notification, the appellant was required to install/use capital goods within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Export Promotion authorities, no duty and confiscation were attracted and that the proceedings were premature. 8. Learned SDR has submitted that the Notification allowed granting of time upto 5 years for the purpose of installation and therefore, the Commissioner was right in holding that the exemption notification remains violated. Ld. SDR has highlighted that according to 25-5-1999 letter of the appellant two machines were yet to be installed. 9. We find merit in the appellant's contentions. Export Oriented Units are allowed duty free import of capital goods and inputs in terms of the EOU Scheme. The Scheme is administered by the Export Promotion Authorities and the unit worked under LOP granted by those authorities. In the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Annexure to show cause notice were not found installed this fact was admitted by Ms. M. Bhattacharjee in her letter dated 25-10-1999, addressed to the Superintendent, Central Excise Range-III. I also find that no goods have been produced by the assessee's unit for export out of India. This fact has also been admitted by the assessee in the reply to show cause notice. 7.2 Further I find that licence No. 5/CUS/BHD/95, dated 12-12-1995 issued to the assessee under section 58 of Customs Act, 1962 was valid upto 31-12-1999. The assessee vide letter dated 20-12-1999 had applied for extension of validity of the licence which was not considered in view of the fact that the Building/Plant machinery were not got insured by the assessee an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
