TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court allows Writ Appeal, setting aside order for duty and confiscation under EPCG Scheme</h1> <h3>M/s. Ramsays Corporation Private Limited Versus The Commissioner of Customs</h3> M/s. Ramsays Corporation Private Limited Versus The Commissioner of Customs - 2022 (381) E.L.T. 372 (Mad.) Issues:Challenge to order under Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) Scheme for non-fulfillment of export obligation and delay in obtaining Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC).Analysis:1. The Appellant challenged the order passed by the Single Judge regarding the EPCG Scheme. The Appellant imported machinery under the scheme with a duty foregone of Rs. 86,37,700. The condition was to fulfill the export obligation by a specified date.2. The Appellant claimed to have fulfilled the export obligation and submitted relevant documents to the authorities. However, there was a delay in obtaining the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) despite reminders sent to the concerned authority.3. A Show Cause Notice was issued proposing confiscation of goods and demanding duty for non-fulfillment of export obligation. The Appellant's submissions and reminders were considered, but the proposal was confirmed due to deficiency letters issued by the authority.4. Subsequently, the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) was issued, confirming the Appellant's compliance with the EPCG Scheme. The delay in obtaining the EODC was due to the authority's actions, not within the Appellant's control.5. The Court emphasized that the Appellant had fulfilled the export obligation as evidenced by the Redemption Certificate. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the Court held that delay caused by public authorities should not result in denial of benefits under the scheme, especially when the obligation has been met.6. The Court cited previous judgments where delays by public authorities did not lead to denial of benefits. Consequently, the Court set aside the Respondent's order and allowed the Appellant to produce documents supporting the export obligation fulfillment within a specified timeframe.7. The Writ Appeal was allowed, and no costs were imposed. The connected application was closed, concluding the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
