TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 731
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner was directed to submit the documents, viz., Bill of entry, shipping bill, export invoice, end-use certificate, BRC, ARE, etc. 2. The petitioner company is engaged in manufacture of high rupturing capacity fuses and fuse components in their unit situated at Pondicherry. The petitioner company imported goods under Customs Notification No.32/97, dated 1.4.1997 which provides for exemption from customs duty for goods imported to India for the purpose of carrying out job work in India and for export of the job worked (finished) product, subject to certain conditions mentioned therein. 3. Having imported the goods for job work, it appears that the petitioner claimed exemption for the period 2000 to 2004 by making an application to the seco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions with reference to imports made during the period 2000 to 2002 and also complied with all the requirements, the said alert was purportedly created for non-submission of documents relating to imports made under Notification 32/97. Later, based on the internal note dated 22.10.2013, alert was removed from the system. Thereafter, the petitioner resumed normal imports and exports through the Chennai Port. 4. While so, the second respondent issued a letter dated 16.9.2013, wherein, it was stated that the first respondent had found that in certain cases, the petitioner had exported the finished goods after six months and thereby, it is liable to pay interest for the delayed period as stipulated in the Notification. Accordingly, the second r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e petitioner concern is arbitrary. He has further contended that the second respondent was informed about all the details relating to the import consumption of imported raw materials and the export of finished products made by the petitioner and that it had exported the finished goods within the stipulated period mentioned in the notification, however, in certain cases, where export was delay, the petitioner sought for permission and after getting approval from the department, made exports during the relevant period, 2000 to 2002. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that if at all the petitioner did not obtain permission for export made beyond a period of six months as alleged by the respondents, it is for the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earance or within such extended period as the Assistant Commissioner of Customs may allow; that the jobbing is undertaken in accordance with the procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules 1996, provided that where the jobbing is to be undertaken by or through cottage industry without being confined to any specific premises, the importer shall executed a bond with such surety or security in such form and for such sum as may be specified by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, binding himself to pay on demand an amount equal to the duty leviable on the goods imported. 9. According to the petitioner, it had imported the goods for job work and claimed exemption und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondent, it appears an alert in respect of the petitioner concern was created. By letter dated 26.12.2014, the petitioner requested the respondents to remove the alert while assuring that they would get clarification from the Central Excise Department. Considering the request made by the petitioner, by proceedings dated 2.1.2015, the first respondent has granted the permission for importation till 12.1.2015 subject to the petitioner producing all the relevant documents on or before 11.1.2015 in connection with the 29 Bills of Entry and payment of duty and interest for the exports carried your beyond the stipulated period of six months in terms of the Notification. It has also been specifically warned that failing to produce the documents, ne....