2006 (8) TMI 405

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t payment of duty as raw material for such manufacture. They are also importing mountings and findings for the manufacture of export jewellery. The finding is a part of jewellery in the shape of clasps, hooks, pin backs, jump rings and ear-ring backs. Mounting is a piece of jewellery that is ready to have the gem stone set in it. The appellants are required to maintain proper records for the import of gold and expert of jewellery. According to the appellant such records were being maintained by them in the regular course of their business and were being verified and checked by the customs authorities as well as by the Development Commissioner. 2. The appellants premises was visited by the Central Excise Officers on 11-11-1995, who u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he opponent under the provisions of Section 112(a) of the customs Act, 1962. Hence the present appeal. 3. We have heard Shri T. Vishwanathan, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri Manoj Krishna ld. SDR appearing for the Revenue. 4. The appellants have strongly contested the demand to be barred by limitation inasmuch as show cause notice has been admittedly issued beyond a period of six months from the relevant date in terms of Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. Commissioner while discussing the action proposed in the show cause notice for imposition of penalty under the provisions of Section 114(A), has observed that there was no collusion, wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts. Accordingly, he has dropp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch, we hold that the demand in question is hopelessly barred by limitation. 5. As regards imports, we find that the major demand of duty is in respect of the gold procured by the appellant stands from MMTC, who have in turn imported the same. The Tribunal in the case of MMTC Limited v. Commissioner of Customs [2001 (128) E.L.T. 412 (Tri.-Del.)] has held that gold imported by MMTC limited and supplied to various units, are liable to pay duty where the same has not been used in accordance with the Notification 177/94-Cus. Reference against the above decision was rejected by the Hon'ble High Court as reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 310 (Del.). As such, we hold that the demand in respect of such gold procured by the appellant from MMTC is....