TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (12) TMI 429
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dentical, we are passing a common order. 2. Brief facts of the cases are as follows. The appellants are 100% EOU. They have been registered under the EOU scheme for production and export of frozen shrimp and other aqua culture products. Even though the product to be exported is processed prawn the appellants cleared shrimp seeds to Domestic Tariff Area (DTA). The shrimp seed is not a finished product. It actually grows further and becomes prawn. The seeds were cleared without payment of duty. Revenue contended that in terms of Notification No. 196/94-Cus., dated 8-12-94 the appellants should have paid the customs duty on the shrimp seeds cleared to the DTA. Several show-cause notices were issued to the appellants demanding Customs du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct for irregular utilisation of the imported inputs procured duty free production of prawn seeds cleared into DTA. Similarly he imposed penalty of Rs. 1 lakh under Rule 209 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001-2002 for irregular utilisation of the indigenously procured duty free inputs/raw materials utilised in the production of Prawn seeds cleared into DTA. He dropped the proposal for confiscation of the indigenously procured capital goods as well as the imported capital goods. The appellants have strongly challenged both the orders. Hence they have come before this Tribunal for relief. 2. Shri S. Murugappan, ld. Counsel appeared for the appellants/Respondent and Shri K.S. Reddy, ld. SDR for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are actually not exported product. Hence condition No. 6 would not be applicable to them. (iv) In the present cases, notices were issued demanding payment of duty in terms of Section 28 of the Customs Act and such demand also was made seeking to classify the seed under Heading 0306.23 of the CTA, 1975. However, in the impugned order, the Respondents has while concluding that no demand as such on prawn seed can be made, has gone beyond the show cause notice and concluded that instead, customs duty on the inputs used in the production of such prawn seed is payable. The respondent has proceeded on this line and demanded customs duty on the imported materials. There is no such proposal in the SCN and the respondent has made out a t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 30-9-1992. In the grounds of appeal, the appellants have not touched these points at all. 4. Ld. SDR reiterated the Orders-in-Original. 5. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. In the order, relating to M/s. The Water Base Limited, the Commissioner has demanded customs duty on the imported inputs, raw materials, consumables, used in relation to prawn seeds cleared into DTA. However, all the SCNs demand customs duty on prawn seed themselves. While, what is demanded in the Order-in-Original is duty on inputs, raw materials, consumables which were imported in relation to the prawn seed cleared to DTA. Thus the impugned adjudication order is going beyond the scope of the SCN as rightly contended by the appel....