TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 47
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1962 [the Customs Act]. 2. It transpires that the appellant is a purchaser of the car imported by Nehru Place Hotel Pvt Ltd [the Hotel] under the Export Promotion Capital Goods [EPCG] licenses issued to the said Hotel. The Hotel was providing hospitalities services to various guests, including international guests and earned foreign exchange. Chapter 6 of the Export/Import Policy 1997-2002 provided for exemption from customs duty to capital goods imported under the Export Promotion Capital Goods [EPCG] Scheme. It also needs to be noted that Notification No. 29/1997 dated 01.04.1997 [Notification dated 01.04.1997] extended complete exemption from basic custom duty as well as additional duty to goods required for rendering services by hot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... authorized representative appearing for the department have been considered. 9. A perusal of the decision of the Tribunal in Interglobe Enterprises Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi - Customs Appeal No. 124 o f2010 decided on 20.11.2025 clearly indicates that the issue involved in this appeal is covered by the said decision of the Tribunal. The Tribunal also distinguished the decision of the Supreme Court in Surya Samudra Holiday Resorts that has been relied upon by the learned authorized representative appearing for the department. 10. The Tribunal in paragraph 12 of the decision examined whether the export obligation were fulfilled only by the usage of the imported cars and after referring to the communication dated 29....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been notified on 14.6.2006 and included as a part of the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-09. Prior to this date, there was no such stipulation in the Foreign Trade Policy Therefore, foreign exchange earnings by use of these vehicles not registered as Commercial/Tourist vehicles cannot be denied the benefits of considering the same towards fulfilment / discharge of EO so long as no other misuse/transfer of such a vehicle/registration of such vehicle in the name other than the licence holder is reported. As regards the mandatory registration of these vehicles as Tourist/Commercial vehicles prior to this date, there appears to be violation of Motor Vehicles Act on account of use of private registered vehicles for commercial purposes. However, this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed his export obligation by providing services related to Travel & Tourism industry." 11. The decision of the Tribunal in Surya Samudra relied upon by the learned authorized representative appearing for the department was distinguished by the Tribunal in paragraphs 17 and 18 of the decision and they are reproduced below: "17. Perusal of the Apex Court decision clearly holds that the Tribunal's findings that the fulfilment of Export Obligation Certificate was not 'determinative' was not sustained. In the context of the instant case, we find that the majority opinion in the said decision of the Tribunal had held that the holding of EODC issued by the competent authority, viz., DGFT was not determinative of fulfilment of export obl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the contrary. Hence, we hold that the appellant had completed his export obligation and the issuance of EODCs by DGFT are determinative of the same." 12. Similar view was taken by a Division Bench of the Tribunal in M/s. Bestech Hospitalities Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), New Delhi- 2025(8) TMI 509-CESTAT NEW DELHI. 13. The relevant paragraphs of this decision dealing with the issues are reproduced below: "19. The issue that arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the demand could be confirmed with consequent penalties for violation of the conditions of the Notification, when the EODC was issued in favour of the appellant evidencing fulfilment of export obligation and it has not been cancel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gation that there was mis-representation. The Supreme Court further observed that if there was any mis-representation, it was for the licencing authority to examine and take steps. 26. The aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court in Titan Medical Systems was followed by the Delhi High Court in Design Company. The Delhi High Court held that it would be wholly impermissible for the customs authorities to ignore the MIES certificate or deprive holder of the said certificate of the benefits that can be claimed in the scheme, absent any adjudication or declaration of invalidity by the DGFT. The Delhi High Court further held that there cannot be a parallel or a contemporaneous power inhering in two separate sets of authorities with respec....