TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 438
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e OIO No.25/2015 dated 28-03-2015. 2. The brief facts are that the Appellant had imported Ordinary Portland Cement 43 Grade falling under CTH 2523 2910 during the period from January 2009 to December 2011 from Pakistan through Tuticorin Port under seven bills of entry. The Appellant had availed concessional rate of CVD (countervailing duty) for one bill of entry under Clause I A, (i), 3 bills of entry under Clause I A (ii) and the remaining 3 bills of entry under Clause I C of the Notification No. 04/2006-CE dated 01-03-2006 as amended. The said Notification prescribes different rate of duty for cement under the different clauses based on various conditions at which the cement bags also and for the cement other than ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....further submitted that in a batch of cases involving identical facts, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal has passed Final Orders Nos. 40323-40332/2019, dated 19-2-2019, setting aside the order of the lower authority and allowing the said appeals. It is submitted that the appeals preferred against the said orders before the Honourable Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court was also withdrawn by the Respondent Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin on monetary grounds. It is his submission that the above Final Order squarely governs the case of the Appellant herein and the fact that the Appellant has not sold the imported goods in retail, further supports the case against the differential duty demand. He prays that the appeal be allowed in terms o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....consumption. At this stage, we find merit in one of the contentions of the Ld. Counsel that the concept of self-assessment of Customs Duty inter alia in respect of imported goods by the importer came into effect only by the Finance Act, 2011 with effect from 08.04.2011. The new Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962 which came to be introduced with effect from 08.04.2011 provided for self-assessment of duty on imported goods by the importer himself. As per the clarifications given in Board Circular No. 17/2011-Cus. dated 08.04.2011, the importer, at the time of self-assessment, will ensure that he declares the correct classification, applicable rate of duty, value of benefit of exemption Notification claimed, if any, in respect of the imported....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e hit by limitation. Further, we find that the very same issue has already been addressed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Diamond Cement Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal - 2017 (352) E.L.T. 177 (Tri. - Del.) on the matter of eligibility to concessional rate under serial number 1C of Notification No. 04/2007-CE. The relevant portion of the judgement is reproduced as under : "2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-Appellants are manufacturer of the cement. They are selling the cement to the agencies on MRP basis, but in some cases selling directly to the consumers which includes the Government agencies, builders, institutions and individuals. When the goods are sold directly to the above-mentioned entities....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the assessee Appellants, especially when the cement packages were cleared without marketing of RSP and with an endorsement of "not for resale". 6. Thus, in view of the above, the sale to the individual without any intermediary person is entitled for concessional rate of duty and is covered by the above-mentioned decision of this Tribunal. 7. Following the ratio of the aforesaid decision, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the assessee-Appellants with consequential relief. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Appellants is allowed and the cross-appeal filed by the Department is dismissed." 9.2 Although the matter relates to a domestic manufacturer, we find that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulfilment, the requirement is to resort to provisional assessment and call for post-importation actual user confirmation. This was not done in the present case which will show that the assessing officer is satisfied with the claim made by the Appellants. The Revenue can initiate demand proceedings of differential duty by denying the exemption later, only upon unearthing the evidences of misuse of such end-use condition. Such evidences have not been brought before us. The impugned orders observe that the Appellants failed to establish actual user. No such condition regarding manner establishing such fact was put at the time of assessment and clearances. The claim in the Bills of Entry at the time of import as well as in the written submissio....