CRAFTSMAN Vs. CC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Order in Original No. No. 15/2006 dt.21.2.2006.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration that the appellants herein had imported raw materials, namely, brass scarp against advance licence dated 11.3.98. While procuring the brass scrap and clearing the same without payment of duty, the appellants contracted for export obligation for export of brass art wares as per condition laid down in Notification No. 30/97 -Cus dated 1.4.97. The lower authorities came to conclusion that the appellants had not fulfilled the export obligation in terms of quantity of the goods to be cleared under the export licence issued a show cause notice to the appellants demanding the duty foregone by the Revenue on the quantity of brass scrap unutilized for the purpose of export obligation. The appellants contested the show cause notice on various grounds and also on the ground that they have completed the value wise export obligation. After following the principles of natural justice, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand. Aggrieved against the said Order in Original, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its Final Order No. A/249/2001 -NB dated 30.3.2001 remanded the case for de novo adjudication giving some directions to the adjudicating authority. Consequent to the directions of the Tribunal, the adjudicating authority granted personal hearing to the appellants and after considering the submissions made by the appellants, came to the conclusion that the appellants had failed to fulfil the conditions No. VI of the Notification No. 30/97 -Cus dated 1.4.97 and he confirmed the customs duty of Rs. 20,79,835.10 alongwith interest @ 24% per annum from the date of clearance till the date of payment. He also ordered for appropriation of amount of Rs. 6 lakhs which was encashed by the lower authorities as bank guarantee given by the appellants. He also imposed penalty of Rs. 4 lakhs under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants before us.

(3.) THE Departmental Representative on the other hand reiterates the finding of the adjudicating authority.