2001 (11) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....igation should have been discharged by exporting goods manufactured in India in respect of which no input stage credit is obtained under Rule 56A or 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2.The department by show cause notice dated 3rd September, 1997 alleged that the appellant had suppressed the fact that it had availed of modvat credit on the inputs used in the manufacture of the exported goods for wrongly availing duty free benefit against the licence. 3.The appellant in response to the show cause notice stated that the advance licence was obtained by it on 1st June, 1993 and it had completed the export obligations by July, 1993. The appellant claimed that it had reversed the modvat credit and rectified the error in their records a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uirement of the scheme not having been fulfilled and the appellant had violated the terms of the exemption Notification No. 203/92 by availing modvat credit contrary thereto, the show cause notice was confirmed imposing custom duty and also the interest and the penalty. 6.The appeal filed by the appellant before the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal partially succeeded inasmuch as order of the Commissioner imposing penalty and demanding interest was set aside but it was confirmed in respect of demand of duty liability to the tune of Rs. 52,41,600/-. 7.Challenging the order of the Tribunal, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the respondent was not justified in denying the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....special leave petitions and connected petitions, it was directed that the petitioners in those cases shall be entitled to release of the goods imported without payment of the customs duty. Counsel contends that the said order had reversed the decision of the High Court of Orissa in Raj Exports v. National Aluminium Co. Ltd. [1996 (87) E.L.T. 349 (Ori.)] whereby the High Court had declined to grant relief to the exporter on account of breach of the conditions of the same exemption notification. The orders dated 21st and 22nd January, 1997 relied upon by the learned counsel were passed on the facts of the said case without settling any principle and without reversing principles laid down by the Orissa High Court. It has not been held by this ....