THIRD MEMBER ON REFERENCE : SHRI P.G. CHACKO, MEMBER (J) AMOD STAMPINGS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by 100% EOU is against the order of the Commissioner confirming demand of Rs. 20,59,192/ - against them by denying them the benefit of Notification No. 2/95 -CE dated 4 -1 -95 along with interest at appropriate rate. The Commissioner has also imposed redemption fine of Rs. 10 lakhs and a penalty of Rs. 4.5 lakhs. For denial of the benefit, the Commissioner has relied upon the following grounds :

(2.) HEARD both sides.

(3.) WE have considered the rival submissions. The issue to be decided is whether the appellants are eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 2/95 -C.E. in respect of their DTA clearance made after obtaining permission from the Development Commissioner against their future entitlements. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to note that the permission for advance DTA sales is given against future entitlements. It is well settled that entitlements for DTA sales is decided by the Development Commissioner and only on his permission, the DTA sales are allowed by the Customs. Therefore, to decide whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 2/95 -C.E., it becomes necessary to examine whether the permission of the Development Commissioner was available and valid. Since this is permission for advance sales against future entitlements, it becomes necessary to examine the permission given by the Development Commissioner; therefore, the relevant portion of his letter giving permission is extracted below :