Appellate Tribunal Waives Pre-Deposit for Export Duty Appeal

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, allowed the appellant's appeal seeking waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. The case concerned the levy of export duty on goods supplied to SEZ developers/units. Citing relevant High Court judgments, including Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. UOI and M/s. Tirupati Udyog Ltd. Vs. UOI, the Tribunal held that export duty was not applicable on goods supplied from the domestic tariff area to SEZ developers/units. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, leading to the disposal of the stay application.

---

---

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery sought by the appellant.
2. Levying of export duty on goods supplied to SEZ developers/units.
3. Legal position regarding export duty on goods supplied from domestic tariff area to SEZ developers/units.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, involved the consideration of the appellant's application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, decided that the appeal needed to be summarily disposed of. The main issue in the appeal was the demand for export duty on certain goods supplied by the appellant to SEZ developers/units during the material period.

Regarding the question of levying export duty on such clearances, the learned counsel for the appellant referred to various High Court judgments to support their argument. One such reference was made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. UOI, where it was held that export duty was not leviable on goods supplied from the domestic tariff area to SEZ developers/units. The counsel also highlighted that a special leave petition filed by the department against the High Court's decision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Additionally, a similar decision of the Hon'ble AP High Court was cited in the case of M/s. Tirupati Udyog Ltd. Vs. UOI and Others, further supporting the legal position that export duty was not applicable in such scenarios.

In light of the settled legal position as cited above, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal. Consequently, the stay application was also disposed of. The judgment was pronounced and dictated in open court, bringing the matter to a close.

---