2004 (12) TMI 155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ce Processing machinery; that however, the foreign supplier supplied only a Colorimetric sorting machine, one Electrical Control Panel and a set of spare parts which were cleared under Bill of Entry dated 8-8-1997; that the foreign supplier could not supply the rest of the machinery as they went into liquidation; that Colorimetric sorting machine could not be used without the rest of the components and other parts; that the machine remained lying idle and unused ever since its import with the result that 100% E.O.U. could not be set up and commissioned; that the foreign supplier was persuaded to accept back the machinery shipped by them; that the Appellants also approached the Customs authorities and the Development Commissioner of Noida Ex....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oods in the warehouse. 3. The learned Advocate further submitted that the goods imported by a 100% E.O.U. are treated as warehoused goods only and the procedure for warehousing the goods is followed after clearance of the goods from Customs; that, therefore, it cannot be said that the present case is not a case of goods in the warehouse, that the Board vide Circular No. 60/99-Cus., dated 10-9-1999 has clarified that in respect of goods imported and found defective/damaged or otherwise unfit for use, the units may be allowed to receive free replacement of the goods prior to re-export of the same; that however, re-export, of such defective/damaged or otherwise unfit for use goods may be subsequently made; that in case the supplier of such ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....No. 53/97-Cus. only permits for the destruction of the capital goods. He also mentioned that the decisions relied upon by the learned Advocate are not applicable as the issue in the case of Khub Engg. related to redemption fine on the goods confiscated and in the case of Indian Charge Chrome the goods imported by a 100% E.O.U. were found defective which is not so in the present matter. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Central Board of Excise & Customs under Circular No. 60/99-Cus., dated 10-9-1999 has considered the difficulties of E.O.U. etc. faced by them in regard to replacement of goods imported and found damaged or defective or otherwise unfit for use. The Board after examining the matter issued the instr....