Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2008 (2) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g been exported are not available for confiscation; he imposed a penalty of Rs 3,50,000/- on the appellants under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 and ordered that the Shipping Bill shall be assessed finally by extending DEPB benefit on the basis of the actual ascertained net weight of 3861 kgs. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellants filed a shipping bill no. 843212, dated 7-8-2000 for a consignment of toothbrush under the DEPB Scheme. The declared FOB value was Rs. 35,27,529/- DEPB benefit was claimed under Sr. No. 104 of Product Group for Plastic @ 17% with a value cap @ Rs. 60/- per kg. The net weight for the consignment consisting of 2800 cartons was declared as 100....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ovided by way of grant of duty credit against the export products. Since the tooth brushes are exported in packed condition. The packing material are also eligible to the DEPB benefit. They contended that since the tooth brushes are invariably sold in packed condition, they, under a bona fide belief, declared the weight of tooth brushes, including the packets in which such brushes were packed. They stated that the General Policy for Packing Material provides for 1% waste for all types of packing material, which itself establishes the Governments intention to extend DEPB facility to packing materials also. They argued that even if it is assumed that the weight of packing material has to be excluded for the purpose of allowing DEPB of Rs. 17 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that in the Shipping Bill, the goods have been described as 2,800 cartons of tooth brush consisting of 1680 cartons of Pepsodent Perfect and 1120 cartons of Close-Up Confident tooth brush. It is also mentioned therein that the packing has been done with each carton containing 180 units. The appellants have declared the gross weight as 10920 kgs and the net weight as 10080 kgs. The DEPB Rate Schedule for tooth brushes as per Sr. No. 104 of Product Code 63 prescribes the rate as 17% subject to a value cap of Rs. 60/- per kg. In the standard output-input norm (SION) against Sr. No. H331 for tooth brush, the various import items that are allowed for 1 kg. of the export item has been prescribed e.g., the SION prescribes the entitlement for plast....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he shipping bill. Each bare tooth brush was packed in the primary packing, which was obviously not 'printed box made of Corrugated Cardboard'. 180 units of the tooth brush with primary packing were put in each carton. The appellants declared the net weight of the tooth brushes with primary packing material as 10,080 kgs. Therefore, the appellants cannot claim the DEPB benefit for the primary packing material under Product Group 'Miscellaneous Items' at Sl. No. 17 as the primary packing material is not "printed box made of Corrugated Card-board". Hence, the appellants claim in this regard is rejected. 11. We find that the appellants have distorted facts in their attempt to avail inadmissible DEPB benefit. This does scant credit to the app....