AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 718
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,03,815 pcs of Needles during the period November, 96 to April, 2003 and issued 12,16,50,000 pcs of Cannulae and 20,49,03,815 pcs of Needles for the manufacture of finished goods. Out of such issue, 65,52,285 pcs of cannulae and 3,26,64,788 pcs of needles were claimed to be waste and scrap. 2. Repeated requests were made to appellant to provide year-wise details of Needles and Cannulae imported duty free and waste and scrap generated in manufacturing of finished products for the period 1996-97 to April, 2003. But appellant provided details in respect of Cannulae only for the period 1997-98 to 2001-02 and no details were provided in respect of needles. Summons dated 13.01.2006, 24.01.2006 and 02.02.2006 were issued to call for information....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to goods which on importation into India are used for the purpose manufacture of articles within 100% EOU and such articles (including rejects, waste and scrap material arising in the course of such articles) even if not exported out of India, are allowed to be sold in India, in accordance with the Export and Import Policy, on payment of duty of excise leviable thereon under Section-3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or where such articles (including rejects, waste and scrap material) are excisable, on payment of Customs duty on imported goods used for the purpose of manufacture of such articles in an amount equal to the Customs duty leviable on such articles, as if imported as such. 5. In the light of above, it was held that customs Dut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is hereby granted for destruction of waste scrap under the admissible limit in the case of M/s Hi-Tech Medical Products Ltd., GIDA, Gorakhpur. 6. Upon examination of above provisions it was opined by ld. Adjudicating Authority that excess waste and scrap claimed to have been generated beyond norm was not permitted to enjoy exemption benefit for which appellant was liable to pay Customs duty forgone on such excess wastage of imported duty free. Appellant never informed the department regarding the excess generation of waste/scrap beyond permissible limit of 5%. Accordingly provisio to Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 for the extended period was invoked for violation of condition of LOP dated 22.09.95 read with Notification No. 53/97-Cu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Medial Products Ltd., GIDA, Gorakhpur under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 with appropriate interest payable under Section 28 AB of the said Act. So also penalty of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) was imposed on the appellant under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. 10. Appellant argued that there is no whisper in the Show Cause Notice about diversion of the import. 5% of the quantity of the goods imported was allowed as waste under law. When the process carried out by the appellant resulted with some loss, the authority should have appreciated such natural loss that had occurred in the course of manufacture. Further, the demand raised in adjudication is barred by limitation. Appellant also relied on the certificate of destr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....generation of waste and scrap, quantum of goods destroyed does not provide any basis to pass a summary order by him. His order is not self speaking. Appellant after providing information for solitary period again requested to ignore the same having mistakes crept therein. No records being maintained by the appellant to provide year wise reconciliation, ld. Authority should have carefully examined quantum of import of input and issue thereof for use in manufacture, arise of output out of such manufacture and quantum of loss occurred in the process in each case to apply the low. A sketchy picture was drawn by him without year wise analysis. When there is fraud against Revenue no plea of time bar is available to appellant following the ratio l....