2014 (9) TMI 324

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ORDER [Order (Oral)]. - RULE; at the instance and request of Counsel for both the sides, the Rule is made returnable forthwith and at their instance, the petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 9 January, 2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), directing the petitioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he department on enquiry, found that the goods were in fact imported not for initial setting up of Plant but for the substantial expansion of existing project of M/s. Indian Glycols Ltd. The petitioner while seeking registration as project imports classified the imported goods for plant under Chapter 98 Heading 98.01 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and claimed the benefit of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s and circumstances of the case, I hereby order the deregistration of the Contract with immediate effect. 2        I direct that the subject goods in question should be assessed on merits in their respective headings and charged to duty accordingly without the benefits of the Project Import Regulations, 1986. 3        I hereby....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not dispute the above position. 6. In view of the above, as no duty demand has been quantified by the order dated 11 June, 2012, no occasion to deposit any amount of duty for the purpose of the petitioner's appeal being heard on merits by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) would arise. It is pertinent to note that the impugned order dated 9 January, 2013, nowhere records the amount of du....