TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 763
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively. Since the SHIS Scheme benefit was not available for the FY 2013-14, the appellant made applications for obtaining Zero Duty EPCG Authorization during the financial year 2013-14. EPCG licence was issued to the appellant for import of capital goods at zero customs duty against which export obligation equivalent to 6 times of duty saved on capital goods imported under the said EPCG Scheme was to be fulfilled in the subsequent years. 2.1. The issue of availment of dual benefit of zero duty EPCG and SHIS by the exporters under the FTP 2009-14 was raised by DRI and highlighted to DGFT. Subsequently, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) also mapped the concurrent availing of SHIS and zero duty EPCG not being in line with FTP 2009-14 provisions. Thereafter, DGFT vide Public Notice No.30/2015-2020 dated 08.09.2016 decided that the exporters who have been issued or availed such simultaneous benefit of these schemes shall be allowed flexibility to choose one of the two schemes and an option to surrender one of the benefits was given. CBEC also, vide Circular No.45/2016-Cus dated 23.9.2016, provided an option to return either of the be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2018 (359) E.L.T. 391 (Tri. - Del.)] 3.2. The appellant further submits that the DGFT had also issued a Show Cause Notice to the appellant against availment of dual benefit; Consequent to issue of Public Notice No.30/2015-2020 dated 08.09.2016 by DGFT and CBEC Circular No.45/2016-Cus dated 23.9.2016, the appellant surrendered the benefits under Zero Duty EPCG and paid an amount aggregating to Rs.57,75,000/- [Rs.47,21,193/- towards duty + Rs.10,52,280/- towards interest] on 13.04.2015 and informed the same to Joint DGFT vide letter dated 11.05.2015. It is stated that on considering the same, the Ld. Additional DGFT has issued duty paid regularization letters, both dated 27.05.2015. Thus, the appellant submits that the issue has been settled by DGFT by regularising the availment of SHIS benefit and hence, the impugned order denying the SHIS benefit and confirming the demand of Rs.3,89,82,117/- along with interest in the impugned order is not sustainable. 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue submits that the appellant is liable to reverse the benefit availed under the SHIS scheme only, as they have first availed the zero duty....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o Duty EPCG Authorization scheme in the same year i.e. 2011-12. From the records as well as the arguments it is brought out that SHIS scrips corresponds to the exports made by respondent in the year 2009-10 whereas the Zero Duty EPCG authorization scheme is issued in 2011-12. The respondent has requested for clarification from the DGFT as to whether there has been violation of notification. Vide e-mail dated 28-7-2014, the reply has been received stating that as the SHIS benefits are for the exports made in the year 2009-10, and the Zero Duty EPCG Authorization is issued in the year 2011-12, there is no violation of the provisions as clarified in Public Notice No. 12, dated 26-7-2013. The public notice clarified the situation as under : "(c) In case SHIS Application is filed within the prescribed date (for exports made during 2009-10/2010-11/2011-12 as the case may be, including any supplementary claim under Para 9.4 of HBP(VI) and where Zero Duty EPCG Authorisation has been issued to the applicant by any RA during the relevant year (i.e. during 2010-11/2011-12/2012-13) respectively, as the case may be) SHIS application shall be summarily rejected in view of fourth sub-par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the procedures as stated above the concerned office of the DGFT could have cancelled the said SHIS or could have rejected the applications for the EPCG authorizations which has not been done by them. It thus shows that the subject scrip/authorizations have been issued in compliance with the policy and the procedures. The SCN or the records don't show that any proceedings have since been initiated against the Noticee by the O/o JDGFT in this regard. On the contrary, the Noticee has produced a specimen copy of the letter of redemption of the EPCG Authorization No. 0230007780, dated 27-3-2012 issued by the RLA which confirms the fact that there is no irregularity in this case. 37. The notice has proceeded by the literal meaning of the terms "year of issuance" and proposes to deny the exemption under notification No. 102/2009, but the term "year of issuance" has to be viewed from the provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy read with Procedures and public notice No. 12 issued by DGFT/RA. The term "year of issuance" has to be related to the period for which the SHIS vis-à-vis EPCG benefits being availed by an exporter and not physical issue of or application for the lic....