TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (9) TMI 100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2.The case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder : The second respondent herein has filed an application under Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962, seeking to settle the matter on the basis that he needs certain consideration in regard to benefits of exoneration of the prosecution etc. The second respondent-company, registered for manufacture and export of plastic ophthalmic lenses, had also obtained two advance licences bearing Nos. 2040439, dated 30-3-95 and 3491572, dated 17-3-95 from Joint Director of Foreign Trade (JDGFT), Bangalore for import of certain raw material required for manufacture and export of ophthalmic lenses before converts to 100% EOU. After the import of raw materials, the 2nd respondent-company failed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e second respondent filed a counter affidavit highlighting their stand. It is stated that the product manufactured by the second respondent require stringent quality norms, being health sensitive material. The imported raw materials under the said advance licence have a very short shelf-life of less than six months and due to technological constraints and ensuing problem encountered during the commercial production, the imported raw materials could not be fully used within six months from the date of import, resulting in shortfall of export obligation. The issue was further compounded as the unit had to shut down its operation on account of the distributor closing its business of distribution in the US. Consequently, results were devastatin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rnment Standing Counsel and Mr. Arvinda P. Datar, learned Senior Counsel for 2nd respondent. 5.In view of the reference made in the earlier part of my order regarding the case of both the parties and the order to be passed herein, it is unnecessary to refer the factual details once again. As said earlier the petitioner has filed the above writ petition mainly on the ground that the conclusion of the Settlement Commission that no interest is chargeable under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 is erroneous and cannot be sustained. Learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel has also pointed out that the very same Commission, in the subsequent orders has upheld the power of the Department in levying interest. It is seen that eve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssion after considering the relevant materials, arrived a factual conclusion that even before the Officers of DRI, took up the investigation, the applicant therein had in fact approached the JDGFT for regularisation, as they failed to fulfil the export obligation and paid Rs. 21,05,271/- on 7-9-2000 and also Rs. 42,40,069/- on 26-9-2000. To put it clear it is the special factual finding of the Settlement Commission that in about a month of the search by the DRI Officers, the applicant therein had paid the said amount. It also arrived a conclusion that the applicant having made full and true disclosure of the duty liability and co-operated with the Settlement Commission, they are entitled for the immunities. After arriving such a factual con....