TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (9) TMI 711
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ernational, M/s. Select Impex Ltd. S/Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Vijay Vanwari, Rajeev Agarwal, M/s. Epsilon Dye Chem Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Masitia Capital Services Pvt. Ltd., Shri Ramesh Shah, M/s. Deepal Corpn. and M/s. B.N. Exports, were represented by S/Shri S.N.Kantawala, Advocate, Naresh S. Thacker, Advocate, Sanjay Agarwal, and Rajeev Agarwal. 2. Shri S.N. Kantawala, the Ld. Advocate was representing the noticees at Sr. No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 & 10 of the Show Cause Notice issued under F.No. DRI/BZU/C/20/2001, dated 3-6-2002. 3. The Ld. Advocate submitted that the applicants had imported capital goods namely 5 cars from U.A.E. for converting them into tourist taxies to be hired on rental basis and claimed their clearance against the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... applicant is ready to pay the entire duty as has been demanded in the SCN. 4. The Show Cause Notice alleges that cars imported by the applicant are not capital goods as defined in the Notification No. 49/2000, dated 27-4-2000. The Ld. Advocate drew the attention of the Commission to the definition of capital goods as provided in Notification No. 49/2000, which reads "Capital goods means any plant, machinery, equipment and accessories required for .......... (c) rendering services. 5. The Ld. Advocate further prayed that on payment of the full duty the car may be released to the applicants and they may be allowed to sell the cars, for that they are ready to give an undertaking as directed by the Commission. 6. Shri N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 10. The Commission has gone through the case records and submissions made by the Learned Advocates of the applicants and the Learned Consultant of the Revenue. 11. On behalf of the Revenue it was submitted that on a reference made by CBEC. Law Ministry has opined that the Settlement Commission can settle the dispute in the matters where importers had not made full and true disclosure of his duty liability before the proper officer and Settlement Commission cannot waive the interest in such matters. The submission was that under the provisions of Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962 the Settlement Commission can entertain application for settling the dispute only in those matters where the importers/exporters had not made ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of Bell Granito Ceramica Ltd. reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 495 (Sett. Comm.) the Settlement Commission had gone into the details and examined various decisions of various Courts including the Supreme Court and come to the conclusion that such cases are well within the purview of the Settlement Commission. 14. The plea of the Revenue for constitution of a Special Bench is well found. The Commission was inclined to agree with the aforesaid submission. However, the attention of the Commission has been drawn to the case of M/s. Ganapathy Smelters Ltd. wherein the Revenue has filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Miscellaneous Petition No. 29188 of 2002 in Writ Petition 21108 of 2002 in the case of Union of Ind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the goods within the first slab of two years where the applicant is not required to fulfil the export obligation within 2 years. 18. The ld. Advocate has also referred to the definition of the term capital goods as appeared in the explanation (1)(c) "rendering services". The contention of the Learned Advocate that he is entitled to import the goods which has rightly been allowed by the Customs at the initial stage has considerable force. 19. However, the applicant has come up for settlement of dispute and has admitted a duty liability of Rs. 62,58,173/- as demanded in the Show Cause Notice. It was further pleaded that the seized goods may be allowed to be released. This plea of the applicant is to avoid deterioration of t....