EOU debonding liability requires fresh adjudication when extension and exit requests remain pending

Duty and interest liability arising from exit from the EOU scheme could not be finalised without first considering the pending request for extension of the LOP/Green Card and the later in-principle exit order. The adjudication had proceeded without examining whether the Development Commissioner's decision altered the appellant's debonding liability, including the plea for reworking duty on depreciation, obsolete packing material, and other relevant exit-related facts. The existing record was therefore incomplete for final determination, and the matter required de novo consideration after all relevant correspondence and factual aspects of exit from the scheme were assessed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of duty and interest arising from the appellant's exit from the EOU scheme required fresh determination in light of the pending application for extension of the LOP/Green Card and the subsequent in-principle exit order.

Analysis: The appellant had sought extension of the LOP/Green Card before expiry and remained in correspondence with the Development Commissioner. The demand was initiated while the request for extension and exit was still pending. The adjudication had therefore proceeded without considering the later in-principle exit order and the consequential effect on the appellant's liability. The matter also involved the appellant's plea that duty should be reworked by taking into account depreciation, obsolete packing material, and other facts relevant to debonding, which had not been examined on merits. The demand, in these circumstances, had to be determined only after the Development Commissioner's decision and the factual position on exit from the EOU scheme were fully considered.

Conclusion: The duty and interest demand could not be finally sustained on the existing record and required fresh adjudication; the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration.

---