2016 (9) TMI 26

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Maheshwari, Advocate for the appellant Rep. by Sh. Govind Dixit, DR for the Respondent ORDER The appeal is against  order dated 24.08.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Export), A.C.C. New Delhi.  The appellant is a consortium of M/s Global Television Services Pty. Ltd., Australia and M/s Shaf Broadcast P. Ltd. India.  The appellant entered into a contract with M....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the goods were already re-exported he allowed a drawback of Rs. 1,74,48,509/-, holding that the appellant is liable to pay net duty of Rs. 34,48,496/- only.  He imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/- under Section 112 and Rs. 50,000/- under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962.  Aggrieved by this order the appellant is before us. 2.  Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve been imported by/ on behalf of Prasar Bharti; used in the broadcasting of Commonwealth Games, 2010 and have been re-exported out of India within the time stipulated in the said notification.  Hence, it is the plea of the ld. Counsel that the impugned order is without any merit and is liable to be set-aside. 3.  Ld. DR reiterated the submissions in line with the findings of the lowe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p; It is also recorded that all the goods imported, duty free in terms of the said notification, have been, in fact,  exported out of country  within the stipulated period of the said notification.  We also take note of the Board Circular dated 13.08.2010 on the issue and also the amendment carried out in the above mentioned notification vide Notification No. 84/2010-Cus dated 27.08....