https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348519 In an EOU duty demand arising from non-fulfilment of export obligation, duty concession on imported and indigenously procured capital goods had to be re-quantified by allowing depreciation for the period of use up to cancellation of the Letter of Permission; the original valuation at acquisition cost alone was unsustainable. On penalty, the Section 112(ii) customs penalty was reduced in view of partial compliance with NFEP and the prolonged dispute, while the departmental request for confiscation and additional penalty under Rule 173Q was rejected. The matter therefore resulted in partial relief to the assessee and rejection of the department's challenge. en-us Mon, 18 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Mar 2019 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348519 In an EOU duty demand arising from non-fulfilment of export obligation, duty concession on imported and indigenously procured capital goods had to be re-quantified by allowing depreciation for the period of use up to cancellation of the Letter of Permission; the original valuation at acquisition cost alone was unsustainable. On penalty, the Section 112(ii) customs penalty was reduced in view of partial compliance with NFEP and the prolonged dispute, while the departmental request for confiscation and additional penalty under Rule 173Q was rejected. The matter therefore resulted in partial relief to the assessee and rejection of the department's challenge. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 18 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348519