Chapter X exemption procedure: non-acknowledgment of AR 3A forms does not, by itself, fasten duty on the manufacturer.

Where motor vehicle parts were cleared under Notification No. 167/79-C.E. through the Chapter X exemption procedure, the absence of consignee acknowledgment on AR 3A forms did not, by itself, shift duty liability back to the manufacturer. The Tribunal treated AR 3A as procedural and not the statutory foundation of Chapter X, and held that accountal and use of the exempt goods remained the responsibility of the beneficiary-user. On that basis, a demand founded only on non-acknowledgment of the clearance documents was unsustainable against the consignor-manufacturer.

---

---

Issues: Whether duty on motor vehicle parts cleared without payment of duty under Notification No. 167/79-C.E. could be demanded from the manufacturer when the AR 3A forms were not acknowledged by the consignee and the goods were not shown to have reached the destination.

Analysis: The exemption operated subject to Chapter X procedure under the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and the dispute turned on whether non-acknowledgment of AR 3A by the consignee shifted duty liability back to the consignor-manufacturer. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that AR 3A is not itself the statutory basis for Chapter X, and that the accountal and use of goods obtained under the procedure are matters to be rendered by the beneficiary-user. It also relied on its prior decisions holding that, once goods are cleared under the exemption procedure, the duty responsibility moves to the buyer-user and not to the originating manufacturer when the departmental demand is founded only on absence of consignee acknowledgment.

Conclusion: Duty could not be demanded from the manufacturer merely because the AR 3A forms were not acknowledged by the consignee, and the demand was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are cleared under a Chapter X exemption procedure, the absence of consignee acknowledgment of the clearance documents does not, by itself, fasten duty liability on the manufacturer if the statutory responsibility for accountal and use lies with the beneficiary-user.

---