TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (6) TMI 374
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an, JCDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. - Vide the impugned order, the Commissioner of Central Excise has confirmed a demand of Customs duty of Rs. 26,82,677/- on capital goods imported by the appellants herein and a demand of Customs duty of Rs. 5,46,607/- on imported raw materials and Central Excise duty of Rs. 13,541/- on duty free raw materials procured ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or permission to destroy the capital goods as well as the raw materials and a small quantity of finished goods lying in stock, on the ground that as per Notification No. 53/97-Cus. which governs the appellant - EOU, there was no provision for destruction of capital goods till 22-5-2000, while the show cause notice had been issued on 11-4-2000, which is prior to the above date. Hence this appeal. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pted. We find that Circular No. 18/98-Cus., dated 16-3-1998 issued by the CBEC clarifies that destruction of waste/scrap obtained in the process of manufacture in the Export Processing Zone when goods were imported under earlier notification not providing for destruction could be permitted under the notification currently in force. The Circular reads as under:- "Destruction of scrap/waste in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n be destroyed out side the zone i.e. whether the goods which were imported under an earlier notification could be allowed destruction under the present Notification No. 133/94-Cus.? (iii) Whether the goods which are permitted for destruction within the zones can be taken for destruction outside the zones, as the notification only provides for destruction within the zone? (2) The Issue has been ....