Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2001 (10) TMI 1099

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is a Private Limited Company with its registered office at 6, Bhaveshwar Sagar, 20, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400037. A SCN dated 10-11-2000 was issued to the applicant by the office of the Commissioner of Customs,; Air Cargo, New Custom House, New Delhi seating that the applicant have failed to adhere to discharge at least 25% of the export obligation fixed for 3 consecutive years and are found liable to remit the full duty forgone as per condition 5 to notification No. 110/95. 2. The brief facts of the case are that in January, 1996, the, applicant applied for and obtained an Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) Licence from the office of Director General of Foreign Trade, New Delhi. This licence required the applicant to export pro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ligations as required in the EPCG licence. Therefore, the applicant have prayed for the settlement of the case in respect of the following : (i)      To accept the admitted additional duty liability of Rs. 14,25,116/- (including the amount already paid) and discharge the show cause notice dated 10-11-2000. (ii)    To waive the interest @ 24% per annum proposed to be charged in the SCN. (iii)   To waive the imposition of penalty on the applicant for the alleged non-fulfilment of export obligation. (iv)   To grant immunity from prosecution to the fulfilment of export obligation against the subject licence. 5. The applicant was heard on 10-7-2001 and 10th August, 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing the circumstances due to which the export obligation could not be fulfilled as required under our Admission Order. 8. The matter was heard for final disposal on 9th October, 2001. The advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that they had imported colour scanner in order to scan picture which could then be used for printing; that this equipment was a pre-press product; that on account of change in technology, pre-press staged has obsolete. As a result of this, internationally the demand for their products has fallen resulting in non-fulfilment of their export obligation. It was rightly conceded by the learned Advocate that the applicant did not make a proper evaluation, of technology before importing the equipment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de any profit or gained monetarily in any way by saving the duty amount. In fact, he had suffered a loss by way blocking his capital in importing the goods which could not be used for the desired purpose. 10. We have carefully considered the submission, both written and oral made on behalf of both the parties. The applicant in his affidavit has affirmed that "in 1997-98 there was a revolution in the pre-press industry wherein there was a shift from high-end pre-press equipment (such as the 342L scanner) to desktop equipment. This was not anticipated by the applicant. As the desktop equipment was much cheaper it greatly reduced the prices charged by pre-press houses world over. As a result, it was impossible to offer cheaper prices f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... duty liability is concerned, the applicant has admitted the entire liability as demanded in the SCN and Revenue does not contest the liability accepted by the applicant. We may mention here that the Additional Bench of this Commission has considered settlement of cases involving imports under EPCG Scheme in the case of M/s. Bell Granito Ceramic Ltd. [2001 (133) E.L.T. 495 (Sett. Com.)] in their interim order No. 4A/2001-CUS and have explained the rationale of settling such cases. We are in full agreement with the views of the Additional Bench. Revenue's reliance on para 52 of the order in the case of TASC Pharmaceuticals Ltd. is also of no avail as in that case the Additional Bench of the Commission at Mumbai granted full immunity from pro....