FLORA TEXTILES LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals arise from common Order -in -Appeal passed by Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy bearing No. 10 and 11/99 (Cus) (MJ) dated 30.9.1999 dismissing the appeals under Section 129E of the Customs Act for non -compliance of interim order directing the appellants to pre -deposit 50% of the amounts confirmed by the Asst. Commissioner, ICD. The amount confirmed was Rs. 16,20,968 and Rs. 6,49,337. Appellants had approached the High Court of Chennai by way of writ petition for restraining the department from enforcing the Bank Guarantee on condition that they would keep the Bank Guarantee alive. The Hon'ble High Court vide their Order dt. 23.3.1999 restrained the department from enforcing the Bank Guarantees and directed the appellate authority to dispose of all the applications of the appellants for dispensation of the pre -condition (sic) deposit within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

(2.) THE Commissioner (Appeals) directed them to pre -deposit 50% of the amount as passed in the interim order and as the appellants did not comply with the same dismissed the appeals for non -compliance on the ground that they are not entitled to the benefit of Public Notice No. 5 (REr99) 1997 -2002 dated 6.4.1999 which grants deemed extension in export obligation period in respect of EPCC. The said notification in para -2 is deemed to have granted the extension of export obligation period upto 31.3.2001 to licence holders provided the licence holder who has failed to complete his export obligation within the earlier stipulated time limit applied for extension of export obligation period on submissions of a bank guarantee covering the customs duty in proportion to the unfulfilled export obligation together with 24% simple interest thereon from the date of import upto 31.9.2001.

(3.) APPELLANTS had in terms of the said notification had executed their bank guarantee for the said period. However, the Commissioner in the impugned order has taken a view that appellants did not have a prima facie case as they had approached the Dy. Director, DGFT for extension of export obligation after the Order -in -Original was passed on 22.12.1998 and for that reason the benefit of the notification is not applicable and hence they are required to pre -deposit the amounts as stated.