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

....llant 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/s Prasar Bharti, Doordarshan, which is a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lowed 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 only ground on which the exemption was den....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arti; 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 lower authority. 4.  After having heard bot....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted, 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 27.08.2010.  The amending notification as well ....