COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORTS) Vs. AKBAR KNITTING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE filed appeal against Order -in -Appeal dt. 11.12.2012 passed by Commissioner (Appeals).

(2.) THE respondent who is a regular exporter of cotton garments had imported Polyurethane Spandex Yarn/Lycra Spandex Yarn under 2 DEEC Advance licences and claimed duty free exemption under Notification No. dt. 19.5.92. As there was a short fall in the export obligation, the adjudicating authority by his order dt. 31.7.2000 confirmed the demand of Rs. 3,83,990/ - along with interest @ 24% and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 34,000/ -. The respondent's appeal was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) and on appeal before Tribunal, the case was remanded to the original authority vide Tribunal's Final Order No. 1386 -1387/2008 dt. 8.12.2008 for recomputation of duty and penalty. The adjudicating authority in the de novo proceedings vide order dt. 11.5.2013 re -worked out the shortage quantity and re -determined the duty of Rs. 3,44,210/ - and also demanded interest @ 15% along with penalty. Respondent preferred an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) contesting only the interest demanded. In the impugned order, LAA has set aside that portion of the order demanding interest. Hence Revenue filed appeal against that portion of the order of Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside interest.

(3.) LD . A.R. for Revenue reiterated the grounds of appeal and the findings of the adjudication. He submits that they have not fulfilled the conditions of the Notification No. and also they have not fulfilled the condition as per the bond executed before the licensing authority. Part "G" of Part -I of the Annexure to the notification clearly stipulated a situation where the conditions of the notification are not complied, duty and interest has to be paid. At column No. 5 of Part "G" clearly shows an amount of duty and interest paid by the licence holder. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously held that there is no provision in the notification for demand of interest. He further submits that once they have executed the bond that they failed to fulfil the obligation, duty and interest is rightly demanded as per the bond condition. Therefore, it is a clear case of violation of Notification No. read with Annexure Part -I and Part -G by which it is established that respondent has not complied with the conditions of the notification. He relied on the following case laws: - -