2018 (9) TMI 47

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o. Ltd., Japan, for import of dry cell producing line (consisting of assembly line and finishing line) for setting up Phase-I of the project at Haridwar, Uttaranchal. On receipt of the goods at port in India, the appellant assessee filed two Bills of Entry No.234775 dated 30.05.2005 and No.259374 dated 18.11.2005, for warehousing on execution of bonds. In order to avail benefit of concessional rate of duty, under Project Import Regulation (PIR), 1986, the appellant approached the Sponsoring Authority, Ministry of Commerce and Industries, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion on 10.01.2006 for their recommendation letter for duty concession under the Project Import Scheme. The Sponsoring Authority endorsed the list of capital goods e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the project import contract, which was in contravention to the Regulation 5 (1) of PIR'86. Hence, the registration of the contract for the said imported goods was irregular which in turn resulted in availment of irregular duty concession to the extent of Rs. 31,30,740/- when calculated under merit rate. Thus the demand for differential duty amounting to Rs. 31,30,740/- (Rs. Thirty one lakh thirty thousand seven hundred forty only) which was short paid is confirmed under section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 and the said importer Viz. Ms Eveready Industries India Ltd., Kolkata, is liable to pay the above duty immediately. (b) The amount of Rs. 20,02,500/- already available with the department as security deposit vide Accounts department receip....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....availing the benefit of project import, shall obtain clearance from the concerned sponsoring authority. In the present case, the sponsoring authority has duly certified that the impugned goods are eligible items to be imported under Project Import. It is his submission that once the sponsoring authority has certified, the benefit cannot be denied. In support of his submission he relied upon the following decision in the case of BSES Kerala Power Limited vs. Comm. Of Customs [2006(196) ELT 246 (Tri.-Bang.]. 3. Ld. DR reiterates the order of the lower authorities. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. We find that the issue in this appeal is regarding demand of customs duty on the ground that the appellant had irregularly ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ustoms Manual. On a careful perusal of the provisions of Chapter-98 of the Customs Tariff Act, read with Regulations 4 and 5 of the Project Import Regulation, it is our considered view that the project can be registered before the goods are cleared for home consumption. In the case of Mihir Textiles Ltd. vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay [1997(92) ELT 9 (S.C.)], the Hon'ble Apex Court had examined the provisions under Chapter Heading 84.66, which laid down that the registration of contract has to be done before any order is made by proper officer of Customs permitting clearance for home consumption or deposit in warehouse. This restriction is absent in Regulations 4 and 5 of the present Regulation under Chapter Heading 98.01. Regulation 4 sp....