TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ense bearing No. 0530137207 was issued to the appellant on 14.10.2004 under Notification No.097/2004-Cus dated 17.09.2004. The license was issued subject to the condition of fulfilling the export obligation and such other conditions as prescribed in the said Notification during the validity period of the said license. The appellant, accordingly, utilized the said EPCG License / authorization for duty saved value of Rs. 9,56,320.82 for import of capital goods i.e. head race tunnel. 2. The Department observed that the export obligation period expired on 13.10.2012 during which the appellant was required to complete the export obligation worth Rs. 76,50,566.56. As per the condition the appellant was required to furnish the prescribed document....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....01.2017. The said facts were duly informed to Commissioner (Appeals) while preferring appeal dated 20th March, 2017 against the said O-I-O. However, Commissioner (Appeals) has considered 14.12.2015 as the date of receipt of said O-I-O instead of 06.01.2017. The said finding is prayed to be set aside merely because the Order-in-Original was not received back undelivered from the postal authority, hence, the service thereof upon the appellant cannot be presumed nor it can be the conclusive proof to hold the same as the date of receipt. The reasoning of Commissioner (Appeals) is alleged to be based upon assumptions and presumptions. 4.1 It is further submitted that the Department has not produced any proof of service of either Show Cause Noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... stage of rebuttal, I observe and hold as follows:- The EPCG authorization was issued in favour of the appellant way back in the year 2004. Under the said authorization, appellant imported a machine by saving a custom duty of Rs. 9,56,32,082/- which was against the license value of Rs. 76,50,566.56. However, it is apparent that the completion of export obligation was never brought to the notice of the concerned Department during the time stipulated in the Notification No.097/2004-Cus dated 17.09.2004, as is apparent from the letter dated 21.04.2015 as produced by the appellant. Perusal of this letter, in addition, clarifies the acknowledgment of the appellant about receiving the Show Cause Notice dated 25.03.2013 on 30.03.2015. Hence the a....