https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783666 The dominant issues were (i) whether the unit continued to have 100% EOU status until a final debonding order, and (ii) whether duty, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were sustainable for failure to achieve positive NFE. Applying CBEC Circular 8/2004-Cus and the absence of a final exit order until a later letter giving retrospective effect, the Tribunal held the unit remained an EOU up to 01.11.2014, so obligations under the EOU notifications and bond continued. Under Notification 52/2003-Cus and Notification 22/2003-CE, duty on capital goods at debonding had to be recomputed with prescribed depreciation; the matter was remanded for recomputation with interest, if any. As no diversion or non-use of goods was alleged and penalties under FTDR were already regulated, confiscation under s.111(o), redemption fine, and penalty under s.112/Rule 25 were set aside; appeal partly allowed by remand. en-us Thu, 18 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 12:19:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783666 The dominant issues were (i) whether the unit continued to have 100% EOU status until a final debonding order, and (ii) whether duty, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were sustainable for failure to achieve positive NFE. Applying CBEC Circular 8/2004-Cus and the absence of a final exit order until a later letter giving retrospective effect, the Tribunal held the unit remained an EOU up to 01.11.2014, so obligations under the EOU notifications and bond continued. Under Notification 52/2003-Cus and Notification 22/2003-CE, duty on capital goods at debonding had to be recomputed with prescribed depreciation; the matter was remanded for recomputation with interest, if any. As no diversion or non-use of goods was alleged and penalties under FTDR were already regulated, confiscation under s.111(o), redemption fine, and penalty under s.112/Rule 25 were set aside; appeal partly allowed by remand. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 18 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783666