TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 1308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by both sides during the hearing, the dispute is limited to the computation of liability to duties of customs on the goods, allowed free at the time of import, that remained after completion of export obligation conditional upon which the exemption had been permitted to be availed. Even less complex is the plea of Learned Counsel for appellant that the impugned order, taken to its logical conclusion, should have rendered proceedings for recovery of differential duty to be barred by being beyond the normal period of limitation prescribed in Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962. 2. The appellant, having been issued with 'advance licence' dated 27th March, 2002 entitling them to procure 'Mono Ethylene Glycol (MEG)' without payment of dutie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sel in this proceeding. According to her, the first appellate authority, after taking note that the constraints in ascertainment of stock-in-balance of the two consignments separately left no option but to value the unutilized goods by 'First In First Out (FIFO)' method, had no hesitation in returning the finding that ingredients warranting recourse to the penalty under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 did not exist which, she contends, should have been held to be no less applicable to the demand under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai v. MMK Jewellers [2008 (225) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)]. It was also argued that no particular method of valuation had been prescribed, till 26t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Sahar, Mumbai [2005 (188) E.L.T. 374 (Tri. - LB)], which held that recovery of duties of customs on conditionally exempted goods did not have to resort to Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962, did validate the demand even if effected under a wrong authority of law. 5. It is abundantly clear from the facts and circumstances that the appellant, in accordance with eligibility for exemption of duties of customs in the import of 'Mono Ethylene Glycol (MEG)' for manufacture and supply of specified goods, had not only availed of that benefit but also, upon fulfilment of the obligation thereto by utilisation of less than permissible quantity, discharged duty liability on goods that remained by applying the lower of the two declared values. Admi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1978 did incorporate Section 143A in Customs Act, 1962 for such eventuality but that was never notified for bringing into force; that very legislative intent appears to have been reflected in the decision of the Tribunal. However, from the enunciation of '21. ... we agree with the conclusion in Lady Amphthil (supra) that duty can be recovered by the Department when post importation conditions of an exemption notification are not fulfilled. We, however, do not agree with the observation in Lady Amphthil (supra) that the period of limitation in such cases will commence from the date of issue of notice. Since the time limit prescribed under Section 28 has been held to be not applicable to such cases, and since there is no other s....