2015 (11) TMI 694 - SC - Customs

Supreme Court dismisses appeal over export zone unit's misuse of manufacturing wastage facility

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal in favor of the respondent, a unit in an export processing zone, regarding the misuse of a manufacturing wastage ... Clandestine clearance of gold - Shortage of gold found - Non maintenance of waste account register - Held that:- Revenue could not make out any case of collusion, willful and mis-statement or suppression and, therefore, extended period of limitation was not applicable. Even on merits, the Tribunal followed its earlier decision in M.M.K.Jewellers vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2003 (6) TMI 80 - CESTAT, MUMBAI]. The same view has been upheld by this Court in Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vs. M.M.K.Jewellers[2008 (3) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT]. - Decided against Revenue. Issues: Misuse of manufacturing wastage facility, shortage of gold, duty confirmation, penalty imposition, appeal decisionIn the present case, the respondent, a unit in a designated export processing zone, was engaged in manufacturing gold jewelry for export. The issue arose when officers discovered a shortage of gold in the unit, leading to a detailed investigation. The unit was found to have misused the facility by showing excess manufacturing wastage, causing a shortage of 25139 gms of gold. The Commissioner confirmed the duty of Rs. 81,65,147 and imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 11 lakhs on the respondent for not maintaining proper waste account registers as required.The respondent appealed to the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), which allowed the appeal. The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to establish any collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression, thus ruling out the applicability of the extended period of limitation. The Tribunal relied on precedent cases like M.M.K.Jewellers vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai and Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vs. M.M.K.Jewellers to support its decision. As the Tribunal's decision favored the assessee based on established legal principles, the appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court.Therefore, the judgment focused on the misuse of the manufacturing wastage facility, the detection of gold shortage, the confirmation of duty, the imposition of a penalty, and the subsequent decision in the appeal process, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the appeal in favor of the assessee.