TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1997 to DTA unit without appropriate authority's explicit permission and without payment of appropriate customs duty that was being held inadmissible by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Goa is assailed in this appeal. 2. Facts in nutshell is that appellant M/s Semco Electric Private Limited is an 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) who imported Die casting machine vide Bill of Entry No. 00137 dated 05.06.1999 availing benefit of Customs duty exemption under Notification No. 53/97-Cus. dated 03.06.1997 that was installed in the factory of the appellant and utilised for manufacturing of resultant product namely electric wiring accessories. The said machine become obsolete for the appellant who decided to sell off the sai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed upon, duty demand along with interest, penalty and redemption fine in lieu of confiscation of goods/machine were confirmed by adjudicating authority and appellant's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) also had yielded no fruitful result. Appellant is before us challenging the legality of such order. 3. In the memo of appeal and during the course of hearing of appeal, learned Counsel for the appellant Shri Narendra Dave and Ms. Lakshmi Menon submitted that there was no requirement under the EXIM Policy to obtain permission from the Development Commissioner for clearance of imported machine and in any case such permission was also granted by Development Commissioner. He further submitted that goods was clearly assessed by the prope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Commissioner (Appeals). He placed reliance in the case laws reported in Unimark Remedies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Export Promotion), Mumbai - 2017 (355) ELT 193 (Bom.) in support of his contention. 5. We have heard from both the sides at length and perused the case record. The primary objection in the audit report was that appellant was refused permission/NOC to clear the said Die casting machine to DTA and had not paid duty on the depreciated value of the goods which was valued at Rs. 12,29,745/- and paid excise duty on transaction value of Rs. 10,25,000/-. Contention of the appellant is that no such permission was a requirement under the EXIM Policy and alternatively it was submitted that express permission was also granted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me. Clarificatory Circular issued by DGFT policy no. 5 (RE-2005)/2004-2009 dated 13.05.2005 as referred above in the preceding para clearly indicates that concessional rate of duty is applicable to the appellant. However, the same should have been on the depreciated value of the goods/machinery which is admittedly not done in the instant case but when the Superintendent of Central Excise accepted the same and debited the transaction value as declared by the appellant before allowing clearance of the said machine and accordingly commercial invoice was raised thereafter with counter signature of Range Superintendent, Appellant's assertion that re-assessment cannot done without review of the order of assessment has its force in view of Section....