Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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: Whether duty demand on goods procured by a 100% EOU under a valid CT-3 certificate and covered by Notification No. 22/03-C.E. was sustainable before debonding or removal from the bonded warehouse.
Analysis: The goods were procured under a valid CT-3 certificate issued after verification, warehoused under Customs supervision, and found to have been put to use in the EOU. There was no finding of diversion or non-use. The subsequent approval by the Development Commissioner also supported the assessee's case. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that, for warehoused goods of an EOU, duty cannot be demanded before debonding, and that the definition of capital goods in the Cenvat Credit Rules is not to be imported into an exemption notification meant for 100% EOUs; the term must be understood in common parlance.
Conclusion: The duty demand was premature and unsustainable. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where EOU goods are procured under a valid CT-3 certificate and accepted into bonded warehousing for use in export production, duty under the exemption regime cannot be demanded before debonding, and the Cenvat Credit Rules definition of capital goods does not control the scope of the EOU exemption notification.