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>Appeals granted, orders set aside, machinery to be unsealed in 30 days, 2-year export obligation period.</h1> <h3>M/s. K.Y. Continental Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur</h3> M/s. K.Y. Continental Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur - TMI Issues:Appeal against confiscation of imported machinery under EPCG scheme, imposition of penalties.Analysis:1. The appellant, a manufacturer of wooden furniture, imported machinery under the EPCG scheme for manufacturing and exporting finished products at a concessional duty rate.2. After a fire incident in 2013, the appellant shifted the imported machinery to a new location without prior permission from DGFT or Customs Department.3. Customs Department issued show cause notices in 2016 for not fulfilling export obligations and not informing about the machinery's relocation, proposing duty recovery, confiscation, and penalties.4. Appellant submitted replies, stating efforts to inform authorities about the relocation, seeking extension for export obligations due to business disruptions, and applying for permission post-relocation.5. DGFT granted an extension for export obligations till 2017, acknowledging the business disruptions and regularizing the machinery's relocation.6. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the duty demand and confiscation but dropped penalties except on the Director.7. Appellant appealed to the Tribunal, arguing inability to fulfill obligations due to disruptions, despite DGFT's extension, as machinery remained sealed since 2016.8. Revenue argued lack of evidence of exports and failure to fulfill obligations, supporting dismissal of appeals.9. Tribunal noted the business disruptions, DGFT's extension, and regularization of relocation, deeming the extension futile due to sealed machinery.10. Tribunal allowed the appeals, ordering the machinery's immediate unsealing and granting a 2-year period for fulfilling export obligations.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the orders, directing the machinery's unsealing within 30 days, and granting a 2-year period for fulfilling export obligations, providing consequential benefits.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
