LAWS(CE)-2012-3-26

SANGHI INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA

Decided On March 05, 2012
Sanghi Industries Ltd. Appellant
V/S
Commissioner of Customs, Kandla Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS stay petition is filed for the waiver of pre -deposit of an amount of Rs. 1,51,62,779/ - on M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd., interest thereof and equivalent amount of penalty and a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on Shri Alok Sanghi, the Director of M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd. on the ground that the appellant has availed wrongly the benefit of duty exemption of importing of Magnesite Refractory Bricks.

(2.) LD . Counsel would take us through the entire Order -in -Original. He would submit that the appellant had imported Magnesite Spinal Bricks under the DFRC and DFIA scheme. He would draw our attention to the standard input and output norms at Sl. No. 1050. He would draw our attention to the facts that the appellants are manufacturing cement for which they were allowed to import magnesite bricks for using them in the kiln. It is his submission that they have imported the item correctly and they have used the same in the factory premises, which is undisputed. It is undisputed that what they have imported is brick which contains 15% of other oxide i.e. Aluminium Oxide. He would emphasise that the consumption of the bricks on receipt of the factory premises is not disputed nor there is any allegation as to contents of the said materials and eligibility to DFRC and DFIA benefits.

(3.) LD . SDR on the other hand would submit that the appellants director and manager had themselves accepted to the shortage of refractory bricks. It is his submission that there is no clear declaration regarding the use of imported goods in the application form, appendix 23 to the DGFT authorities. He would also take us through the various specifications of laboratories and submit that Magnesite Refractory Bricks and Magnesite Spinal Bricks are different. It is his submission that both would fall in different Customs Tariff Headings and the goods imported could not be imported under DFRC and DFIA benefit and the appellants should have discharged duty liability.