The CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the order by the...

The CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the order by the Commissioner (Preventive) that denied exemption benefits under the EPCG Scheme on imports of two vehicles. The Tribunal held that once the DGFT issues an Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC), customs authorities lack jurisdiction to question its validity or deny benefits absent prior adjudication or cancellation by DGFT. Reliance was placed on precedent establishing that allegations of misrepresentation must be addressed by the licensing authority, not customs. Statements under section 108 of the Customs Act were deemed insufficient to negate the EODC's validity. Consequently, the penalty imposed under section 112(a) of the Customs Act was also quashed. The decision affirms the exclusive jurisdiction of DGFT in matters relating to export obligation fulfillment under the FTDR Act and prohibits customs from independently denying EPCG benefits without DGFT adjudication.

---