COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE Vs. SAMI LABS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the revenue being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal [2007 (216) E.L.T. 59 (Tribunal)] holding that the raw materials/capital goods which are used in the premises for production would not be hit by the Explanation to Rule 6 of Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001. The assessee is a 100% Export Oriented Unit manufacturing herbal extracts, fine chemicals etc. On 20-11-2004 a fire accident took place in the premises of the assessee. It was intimated to the jurisdictional Superintendent who visited the premises for verification. Accordingly a mahazar was drawn and the respondent was asked to furnish the details of the actual loss of the capital goods/raw material/consumable/imported/procured indigenously duty free under the provisions of Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31-3-2003 and also under the Notification No. 22/03 dated 31-3-2003. The respondent by the letter dated 10-5-2005 has furnished the details. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner issued a show cause notice calling upon the respondent to show cause as to why the concession of duty of Rs. 12,83,578/- foregone on the imported raw material/capital goods shold not be recovered under Section 72 read with Section 28 of the Customs Act, with interest. On consideration of the reply an order was passed and the proceedings were dropped Aggrieved by the same, the revenue preferred an appeal before the Commissioner who allowed the appeal and confirmed the demand. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the Explanation to Rule 6 would not affect the case of the assessee and hence this appeal by the revenue.

(2.) This appeal was admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) Heard counsels.