AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 725
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd order of the Tribunal wherein the Tribunal has disposed of the appeal filed by the assessee. 2. The assessee imported the machine in the year 1996 under the Government Scheme of EPCG license which was subsequently because of the government policy cancelled and he has applied for 100% oriented unit. 3. Counsel for the appellant Mr. Jhanwar contended that the appeal of the assessee though preferred subsequently is required to be heard first inasmuch as if the appeal is allowed then the department appeal will not have any effect inasmuch as if the goods is required to be released pursuant to the government circular, the second appeal will become academic. 4. This Court while admitting the matter framed the following substantial que....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....letter dated 07.08.1998. The Development Commissioner also gave permission vide letter dated 31.08.1998. They also applied for the cancellation of EPCG licences issued by the DGFT authority and the same were cancelled in November, 1998. A show cause notice dated 12.03.1999 was issued on the ground that the goods imported under EPCG Scheme under Notification NO. 110/95-Cus and lodged in the warehouse have not been cleared from the warehouse even after the expiry of the warehousing period and that the condition of import under EPCG was not fulfilled. The original authority confirmed the duty, besides confiscating the goods. In pursuance of the direction of the Tribunal dated 01.12.2003, the matter has been re-considered and by the impugned or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... saying that warehousing period in respect of the goods have already expired. In these circumstances, we find that it is fit case for reconsideration in the light of the Board's circular. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for deciding afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants. The appeal is allowed by way of remand." 7. He contended that while deciding the matter, the observation made by the authority is not only desirable but also the Tribunal has ignored the observations made by the earlier authority. 8. This being the State of Affairs that the goods which was imported in March, 1996 is lying in warehouse and the notification which came to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pectively in respect of these two lots; but the goods were still not cleared by the assessee. Finally their request for further extension was turned down by the Chief Commissioner (JZ), Customs & Central Excise Jaipur on 10.02.98. Since the extension of warehousing period was not granted and the goods were not removed from the warehouse on the expiry of the period 23.10.97 and 20.10.97 upto which these goods were permitted under Section 61 of the Customs Act 1962 to remain in the warehouse; in terms of Section 72(1)(b) such goods were treated as goods improperly removed from the warehouse. Section-1119j) provides that any dutiable or prohibited goods removed or attempted to be removed from a Customs area or from a warehouse without permissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....MSL/4/95/2059 datd 04.02.2005 has informed that neither the asseessee has a valid LOP nor any request from them has been received for installation of 100% EOU. The unit is also lying closed since long period. 12. In view of the above discussion and the fats of the case, I hold that M/S Modern Sui tings, Ltd., Alwar are not having the status of an EOU and therefore, their case is not covered under Board's Circular No. 75/99 dated 10.11.1999, 13. Accordingly I pass the order as follow:- 13. In our considered opinion, when the Tribunal in first order passed has make it clear that in view of the circular if EPCG Scheme is licenced under EOU it be considered. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that both the au....