2017 (10) TMI 150

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for initially setting" up of the plant in terms of Project Import Regulations. Appellant had also imported computerized PCB in-circuit tester for test bench for ticket office machine which was assessed at concessional rate of duty at 30% + Nil against merit rate. Appellant also imported validator which was also assessed at concessional rate of duty. Since the appellant did not produce installation certificate even after reminder letters, SCN and personal hearing opportunities given to them, duty liability at merit rate amounting to Rs. 1,47,65,239/- was confirmed by the original authority vide order dt. 18.11.2004. Aggrieved, appellant preferred appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide order dt. 07.08.2006 dismissed the appeal for no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case had taken place in 1989 and therefore, the requirement for submitting the installation certificate does not arise. Reliance is placed on the following decisions : (i) Polyplex Corporation Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - 2007 (211) ELT 548 (Tri-Del) (ii) Creative Industries Pvt Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (A-II), Hyderabad - 2008 (228) ELT 379 (Tri-Bang) (iii) Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Hyderabad Vs. Creative Industries (Rajamundry) - 2012 (282) ELT 349 (AP) (iii) Appellant is in possession of other evidence to prove that the imported goods were installed in their factory. These evidence include the fixed asset register maintained by the appellant under the Companies Act, 1956,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ention that the requirement to produce certificate was introduced in the Regulations only w.e.f. 07.01.1992. The impugned imports had taken place vide Bills of Entry No.5219 dt. 25.01.1989 and B/E No.56668 dt. 25.01.1989 and 24.10.1989. On the other hand, appellants have produced evidences like fixed asset register, copy of invoices for sale of self-printing ticketing machine to the Railways, copy of gate passes for removal of such self-printing ticketing machine etc. Before the lower appellate authority appellant had produced copies of invoices No. 22 to 32 issued during 13.3.89 to 17.4.89 as the evidences of supply of goods manufactured after installing the goods covered by the first consignment. The Tribunal in the case of Creative Indus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alidator by Bill of Entry No.56668 dt. 24.10.1989, appellants have contended that the goods were never cleared by them. From the facts of the case, it emerges that appellants had not mentioned or produced evidence for abandoning the goods during the time that they were in bond. We therefore hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be faulted in his conclusion that plea of the appellant for abatement of the duty on the warehoused goods they were not cleared cannot be entertained notwithstanding such warehoused goods were disposed of by the department. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also pointed out that the appellant had given a double duty bond undertaking at the time of bonding the goods, by virtue of which they are liable to pay the du....