TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (5) TMI 231
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Divisions observed as follows - (i) Imports made pursuant to the agreements entered and the santious granted of various raw material and components claiming the benefit of Notification 13/81-Cus., dt. 9-2-81 as amended and subsequent Notification dt. 53/97-Cus., dt. 3-6-97 the EOU had also procured certain raw material and components of indigenous sources under benefit of Central Excise Act 1944 Notification Nos. 123/81-C.E., dt. 2-6-81 & 57/94-C.E., dt. 1-3-94 & 1195-C.E., dt. 4-1-95 as amended. (ii) the unit had commenced production from 1-6-90 & had made physical export only for 4 years i.e 1990-91 to 1994-95 with value addition, instead of 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also imposed under Section 117 of Customs Act, 1962 for the goods having remained in the warehouse. (ii) Central Excise duty of Rs. 3,55,308/- was demanded on goods of Indian origin along with interest. (iii) Penalty of Rs. 75,000/- under Rule 173Q was imposed under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (as it existed) for the contravention of the Central Excise contraventions holding the goods so brought to be liable to confiscation for not having been used for the purpose they were brought. (iv) Warehouse licence issued under the Customs Act were cancelled. (v) Penalty of Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1944 which does not apply to 100% EOU as well as Rule 196. (d) There is no conflict that for period up to Feb. 96, manufacturing activity took place and components were used. There is no evidence of evasion or otherwise of a removal of components from the premises. Therefore, benefit of the Custom Exemption notification have to be granted. As regards the components not used and still in the bonded warehouse they are on record. Duty on such components can be demanded only on their removal or expiry of Bond Period. The Customs Act, 1962, provides for an extension of the three year Bond period for such goods, as in this case, which are not likely to deteriorate. The Commissioner should have grante....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication of Board's orders and reasons are not forth coming in the order. (f) There is force in the plea made that Notification 13/81-Cus., has no provision for levy of interest and since the demand in this case is made in terms of Notification 13/91-Cus., no interest is leviable on the appellant. (g) The CBEC vide circular dated 3-12-85 has clarified that for an 100% EOU a policy decision of liberal grant of extension of the Bonding/warehousing period as also waiver is applicable and vide circular dated 7-4-86 for capital goods ordered an automatic extension of warehousing period and vide circular dated 27-12-93 have clarified "a policy decision ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erest demands cannot be upheld. The extensions herein are called for and are granted. (h) The order therefore as regards duty demand and interest is therefore required to be set aside. 2.1 (a) Since the violation of non-clearance of goods on expiry of warehousing period are not being upheld there is no cause to conclude duty demands or violation of the Customs Notification and no confiscation of goods or liability under Section 111 of Customs Act, 1962 has been shown to have arrived by the Commissioner, penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot therefore be upheld. (b) The penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, of 10,000/- as ....