Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether duty was payable on the imported capital goods at the time of debonding on the basis of depreciated value; (ii) whether penalties were imposable on the appellants.
Issue (i): Duty liability on debonding of a 100% Export Oriented Unit was examined in the light of the fact that the unit had been found running, the Development Commissioner had permitted debonding, and the appellant had already paid duty on the depreciated value of the capital goods. The Tribunal also noted that the applicable view was that duty was recoverable at the rates prevailing at the time of debonding on depreciated value.
Conclusion: The duty paid on depreciated value at the time of debonding was held to be proper, and the Revenue's demand for the full duty saved was rejected.
Issue (ii): The question of penalty was examined with reference to the closure of proceedings by the Development Commissioner and the absence of a specific provision invoked for penalty in the facts of the case.
Conclusion: No penalty was held imposable on the appellants.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeals succeeded with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: On debonding of a 100% Export Oriented Unit, duty on imported capital goods is recoverable at the applicable rates on depreciated value, and penalty cannot be sustained in the absence of a specific enabling provision and a surviving basis for penal action.