2006 (9) TMI 75

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hey were carrying on their business under an agreement with the Union of India by which they were not liable to pay any Customs Duty for such import on their export of the reprocessed goods to abroad. This facility was extended by Union of India as and by way of incentive so that foreign exchange could be earned and brought within the country by the exporting the reprocessed goods. 3. Under the agreement, the appellants were also entitled to sell a part of the reprocessed goods within the country upon payment of inter alia, appropriate duty commonly known as countervailing duty. 4. The appellants sold reprocessed plastic granules/agglomerate manufactured at the Export Processing Zone at Falta in the domestic tariff area which is commonly ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....air competition which might be faced by the indigenous manufacturers dealing with the identical products within the country. 7. Identical issue was considered by me sitting singly in the case of Durga Metal Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 2001 Volume 131, Excise Law Times, Page 544. In the said decision the importer of rejected aluminum cans came up questioning the authority of the revenue to levy countervailing duty on the used cans when those were brought out from the customs appointed warehouse for sale in DTA Area While deciding the issue I considered four Apex Court decisions which are as follows (i) 1985, Volume 20, Excise Law Times (Supreme Court) Page 222 (Khandelwal Metal & Engineering Works v. Union of India) (ii)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....isions and ultimately came to a finding that exemption of excise duty extended to the indigenous manufacturers of plastic materials could not be extended to the importers who wanted to sell the reprocessed goods of like nature in DTA area and as such dismissed the writ petitions. 10. We heard both the appeals on the above-mentioned dates. 11. In addition to the points so canvassed by the appellants before the learned Single Judge Mr. Chowdhury appearing for the appellants contended before us that once the goods were reprocessed within the export free zone and were brought out from the said zone for DTA sale the excise duty levied on the like articles by the excise authorities from the indigenous manufacturers could be levied on the import....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 15. In the case of Narendra Pal Singh (supra) the goods were imported from outside solely for the purpose of exporting the same to Bangladesh and India was virtually used as a corridor. The learned Judge quashed the demand on account of anti dumping after finding that the goods were not dumped within the country. Such decision of His Lordship, in our view, has no application in the instant case. 16. In our view, the learned Judge rightly rejected the writ applications following the well settled principles of law so decided by the Apex Court in the case of Hyderabad Industries (supra as well as Khandelwal Metal & Engineering Works (supra). The issue was also gone into by me in the case of Durga Metals (Supra) which is still hold to be goo....