2018 (7) TMI 1604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onditions as contained in Notification No. 53/97-CUS dated-3/1/1997 as amended by Notification No. 52/93- CUS dated-31.3.2003. In the impugned order Rs. 10.00 Lacs was imposed on the applicant under the Provisions of Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 alongwith the interest as applicable. 2. The issue involved in this case is regarding destruction of the material obtained by the appellant against the provisions of EPCG scheme, which was subsequently converted into 100% EOU to fulfil the export of the finished goods with the value addition. Subsequent to this conversion also, the appellant could not fulfil the net foreign exchange earning as contemplated in the conditions attached thereto. As the technology for which the appellant h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....duty, where the beneficiary could not fulfil the obligation, such case would be referred to the Development Commissioner. Demand of duty initiated by the Customs Authority should be confirmed only after Development Commissioner has arrived at a definite conclusion. The case of the appellant is covered by the Board's direction as in this case Grievance Redressal Committee has already taken a decision to allow the scrap of old, obsolete machinery as per para 5.3 of the Exim policy. He also relied upon many decisions where it has been held that no confirmation of demand can be done by the Customs in such cases without the consent of Development Commissioner. Following judgements are noteworthy: (i) Vishal Footwear Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Customs....