TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 1046
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed 28-2-1999. 2. Upon receipt of intelligence that the appellant was misusing the above benefit, a Preventive Unit of the department visited their factory on 6-9-2000 and conducted verification of records, during which it was noticed that the imported inputs had been used in the manufacture of parts of connectors viz. housings, terminals etc. and these products were cleared from the factory. It was also noted that housings, terminals etc. (parts of connectors) were not specified as finished goods in the above Notifications. As part of further investigations, the officers recovered the relevant records along with samples of goods (housings, terminals and connectors) from the factory, recorded statements of the Finance Manager and the Executive Director of the company and also gathered an expert's opinion from the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. The Finance Manager stated that, in the declarations filed under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the fully assembled connectors were classified under Heading 85.36 and terminals, housings etc. in disassembled condition were classified as parts of connectors under Heading 85.38. The Executive Director endorsed the ab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, took the view that, under Rule 8 of the said Rules, the differential amount of duty on the imported goods was recoverable from the appellant through enforcement of the bonds executed by them. 5. Accordingly the following show-cause notices (SCNs) were issued to the appellant by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-IV Division :- Sl. No. Date of issue Period Customs duty demanded 1. 28-8-2001 27-8-1996 - 30-4-2001 >1.67 crores 2. 20-5-2002 1-5-2001 - 30-6-2001 >8.2 lakhs 3. 8-9-2003 1-7-2001 - 31-1-2002 >47.6 lakhs 4. 13-2-2004 1-8-2001 - 1-4-2002 >7.5 lakhs 6. In their replies to the above SCNs, the appellant submitted (a) that Rule 8 of the 1995 Rules did not confer jurisdiction on the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise to issue the demand notices; (b) that, as the bills of entry had been finally assessed under Section 17 of the Customs Act, any subsequent demand of duty should be made only by the process of reassessment and this could be done only under Section 28 of the Act; (c) that the SCNs issued without obtaining prior approval of the Chief Commissioner of Customs or the Commissioner of Customs (depen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....clarations in the Central Excise Divisional office, obtained registration from that office for import of goods at concessional rate of Customs duty and also executed the necessary bonds at the same office. The first appellate authority also overruled the jurisdictional objection by relying on the Tribunal's decision in Samtel Color Ltd. v. C.C.E., Meerut, 2000 (126) E.L.T. 1256 (Tribunal). The claim of the assessee for the benefit of the Notifications was also rejected on merits by both the authorities. The plea of limitation was also rejected. 9. In these appeals, we heard advocate for the appellant (assessee) and SDR for the respondent. The jurisdictional issue was vigorously debated. The learned advocate, apart from reiterating the assessee's contentions, pressed into service two orders of the Tribunal viz. N.B. Footwear v. Commissioner, 2007 (209) E.L.T. 102 (Tri. - Chennai) and APP Enterprises v. Commissioner, 2008 (231) E.L.T. 110 (Tri.-Chennai). The learned SDR claimed support from the decision in Samtel Color Ltd.'s case. She also relied on the reasoning of the original authority on the aforesaid issue. It was particularly submitted that the demand of duty was not to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ope is not permissible. The entries at serial Nos. 33, 79 and 112 of Notifications 64/95, 13/97 and 25/99 respectively would clearly show that 'parts of connectors' could be imported at concessional rate of duty for use in the manufacture of 'connectors'. There is no ambiguity in these entries and therefore there is no occasion or reason to interpret them. The entries clearly reflect the legislative object which we have already indicated above. Easily, on merits, the Revenue has established their case that the appellant misused the Notifications to avail the benefit of concessional rate of duty. 12. The question now to be considered is whether the differential amount of Customs duty was sought to be collected in the manner authorized by law. The supreme law in this domain is Article 265 of the Constitution of India, which forbids levy and collection of taxes except by authority of law. The statutory provision which authorizes collection of Customs duty not levied or short-levied or erroneously refunded is Section 28 of the Customs Act. Under sub-section (1), the proper officer may serve notice on the person chargeable with the duty requiring him to show cause why he should no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iolated by the importer, the duty or the differential duty, as the case may be, becomes leviable and, ipso facto, the provisions of Section 28 get attracted for collection of such duty. Of course, it can be said that, in the process of collection of the duty amount, the bond is enforced against the importer. 14. The show-cause notices in question were issued under Rule 8 of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. These rules were made under Section 156 of the Customs Act and came into force on 1-9-1996. Section 156 as it stood on the said date reads as follows :- "Section 156. General power to make rules. - (1) Without prejudice to any power to make rules contained elsewhere in this Act, the Central Government may make rules consistent with this Act generally to carry out the purposes of this Act (2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely :- (a) the manner of determining the transaction value of the imported goods and export goods under sub-section (1) of Section 14; (b....