TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (3) TMI 285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....filed by the assessee. 2. The facts of the case are that M/s. Alstom Projects India Ltd., imported units of Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) and accessories vide two Bills of Entry No. 150 dated 16-3-2005 and No. 267 dated 1-6-2005 and claimed classification of the goods under Chapter Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff as project imports. The appellant had followed the procedure of registration of the contract under Project Import Regulations, 1986 (PIR). Subsequently, on 16-4-2007, the assessee furnished certificate dated 12-4-2007 of the Chartered Engineer certifying installation of the impugned goods imported under PIR. Letter dated 25-9-2007 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Kakinada certifying that the goo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stantial condition for availing the benefit of concessional rate of duty under PIR by not submitting the reconciliation statement within three months of completing the import and not getting the time to file the reconciliation statement extended by the competent authority. 3. The impugned order is assailed on the ground that it had denied substantial benefit to the assessee for the assessee's failing to satisfy a procedural condition. The authorities ought to have condoned the delay in filing the reconciliation statement and extended the benefit admissible to the impugned imports under PIR. It was settled law that a substantial benefit could not be denied for violation of procedure. They relied on the following observations of Supreme Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e this Tribunal in the case of Gas Authority of India Ltd. - 2003 (159) E.L.T. 468 and this Tribunal held that the assessments are required to be finalized in terms of the project contract and deregistration of contract and recovery of duty were not warranted." (ii) Creative Industries Private Limited v. C.C.E., Hyderabad - 2008 (228) E.L.T. 379 "10. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that Regulation 7 is not a condition determining the eligibility of the impugned goods for the benefit of concessional rate of assessment under Project Import Regulation. It is only a procedural requirement. There is no evidence to show that the equipment has not been installed. Revenue could have deputed some officer to verify the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellants for being heard in their defence and placing documentary evidence as they may choose, to substantiate their pleas, in the light of the Tribunal's order in Gas Authority of India Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai - 2003 (159) E.L.T. 468." 3.2 Reliance is also placed on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. CC (Import), Mumbai vide Final Order No. C-1/2071-72/2002-WZB dated 29-7-2002 and in the case of Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai - 2003 (159) E.L.T. 468 (Tri.-Mumbai). In the first case cited, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (A) denying the project import benefit for violation of Regulation 7 of PIR and remanded the matter for a fresh decision in acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of contract - The importer shall within three months from the date of clearance for home consumption of the last consignment of the goods or within such extended period as the proper officer may allow, submit a statement indicating the details of the goods imported together with necessary documents as proof regarding the value and quantity of the goods so imported in terms of this regulation and any other document that may be required by the proper officer for finalization of the contract." 6.1 We find that there is no dispute that the goods imported had been put to use as required. We also find that the proper officer could have condoned the delay in submitting the documents and regularise availment of the benefit exercising the di....