TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 851
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oddar, ld. AR. 3. Appellant is functioning from Noida Special Economic Zone since the year 2004. Matter pertains to the period of year 2009. The appellant mentions that they import gold and export manufactured gold jewellery and are a net foreign exchange earner under SEZ scheme. They exported gold jewellery (earrings) weighing 2229.800 gm. alongwith other jewellery; however said earrings were rejected by the foreign buyer due to polishing defect; and returned jewellery weighing 2294.840 gms. 3.1 The defective jewellery weighing 2294.840 gms., imported by the appellant vide Bill of Entry No. 2062 dated 22.04.2009 was exchanged with well polished jewellery weighing 2294.840 gms., which was seized by Customs on 26.04.2009. 3.2 The departme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 21 of SEZ Act, 2005 were not observed. Government of India MC&I (DC) vide Notification S. No. 77(F) dated 13.01.2010 has authorised jurisdictional Development Commissioner to be the Enforcement Officer in respect of notified offences committed in a SEZ. (v) Section 51 of SEZ Act, 2005 containing overriding provision provide that the provisions of SEZ shall have effect not withstanding anything inconsistent, contained in any other law. The said overriding provision clearly provides that investigations, search and seizure and recovery of duties shall be carried out under the SEZ Act, 2005 and Rules made thereunder and not under the provisions of Customs Act, 1962. (vi) Mere invocation of inapplicable provisions of law in the SCN ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in Noida SEZ Unit, who had the jurisdiction to take necessary action. For this reason also, the impugned orders are not sustainable." 6.1 Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bharat J. Gandhi (supra) has inter-alia observed in its para 6 and 7 as under: 6. after SEZ Act, 2005 coming into force wherein specific authorities are provided. The Court is of the opinion that the Customs authorities seems to have been rendered functus officio so far as the matter pertaining to the conduct of a unit situated in SEZ is concerned. 7. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the matter of Whirpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai (supra) until the authority issuing show cause notice is able to satisfy the Court....