2012 (6) TMI 218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....la, Sr. Adv. with Mr Aditya Chitale, Adv. Per: S S Kang: Heard both sides. 2. The Revenue filed this application for early hearing of the stay applications. As the stay applications are listed today, therefore, the early hearing application is dismissed as infructuous. 3. The appellant filed this appeal against the demand of Rs.3,95,07,391/-, interest and penalty. The demand is confirmed after....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ification no. 21/2002. 5. The contention of the applicant is that on 3.3.2006 the applicant wrote a detailed letter to the Revenue seeking guidance for clearance of the goods under Notification 6/2006 and the Revenue replied to the same that they are entitled for the benefit of the Notification subject to the fulfillment of the condition. Thereafter the applicant cleared the goods during the peri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rom payment of Customs duty. In the present case as the goods were cleared for Mega power project and are exempted under Notification no. 21/2002-Cus, when imported into India, therefore, the applicant fulfilled the condition imposed under Notification no. 6/2006-CE. 7. The applicant also submitted that the demand is time barred and on 3.3.2006 the applicant wrote a letter seeking permission to c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s rightly made. It is also submitted that all the facts were not brought to the notice of the Revenue. 9. We find that the Revenue wants to deny the benefit of notification 6/2006-CE by invoking the provisions of Exim Policy. As noted above, the condition 19 of Notification 6/2006 provides that if the goods are exempted from the duties of customs leviable under the First Schedule to the Customs T....