Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs Reliance Industries Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 23, 2001

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25136

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/25136
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Aug 23, 2001
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

Reliance Industries Ltd.

Excerpt

.....to revaluing the goods under section 14 of the act. the value of warehouse goods is determined on their arrival and there is no provision to revalue them when they are cleared from the bonded warehouse.4. both the notifications are issued under sub-section (1) of section 125 of the act. each of them grants partial exemption from duty to catalysts containing platinum, palladium or silver produced out of certain metals sent out of india subject to the conditions therein. the exemption contained in the notification is from so much of the duty, as is in excess of the duty which would be leviable if the value of the goods were equal to the aggregate of production or processing costs (the elements of which are specified) and the insurance and freight charges both ways. in other words, to apply the exemption, the value of the goods is first determined by totalling the production or processing cost, and the insurance and freight charges both ways and the rate of duty applicable to the relevant heading of the tariff is to be applied to the value so arrived at and the duty accordingly determined.5. it is not possible for us to agree that the result of application of this exemption notification is the reduction of the value for assessment. the value of these goods under section 14, which was determined on their importation into india continues uncharged during the period that is remained in the bonded warehouse. it is only for the purpose of assessment to duty that their value was determined by applying the criteria specified in the notification. if, for example, for any reason, the benefit of the notification was not claimed, or claimed but not granted, the value on which the duty calculated would be determined in the bill of entry which was filed for depositing the goods in a bonded warehouse. in other words, therefore, while the application of the notification requires determination of a notional value, that is not the value of the goods under section 14 of the act.we do.....

Full Judgment

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the benefit of notification 296/92 and 297/92 both issued on 18.11.1992 would be available to the goods imported by the respondent, deposited in a private bonded warehouse on 14.7.1992 and removed from it in February, 1993.

2. In his order impugned before us, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that, by application of the provisions of Section 15(1)(b) of the Act, it is the rate of duty prevailing on the date of removal from the bonded warehouse will apply and concluded that the benefit of notification 296/92 (granting exemption from basic, auxiliary duty of Customs) would apply.

3. The ground in the appeal is that application of notification amounts to revaluing the goods under Section 14 of the Act. The value of warehouse goods is determined on their arrival and there is no provision to revalue them when they are cleared from the bonded warehouse.

4. Both the notifications are issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 125 of the Act. Each of them grants partial exemption from duty to catalysts containing platinum, palladium or silver produced out of certain metals sent out of India subject to the conditions therein. The exemption contained in the notification is from so much of the duty, as is in excess of the duty which would be leviable if the value of the goods were equal to the aggregate of production or processing costs (the elements of which are specified) and the insurance and freight charges both ways. In other words, to apply the exemption, the value of the goods is first determined by totalling the production or processing cost, and the insurance and freight charges both ways and the rate of duty applicable to the relevant heading of the tariff is to be applied to the value so arrived at and the duty accordingly determined.

5. It is not possible for us to agree that the result of application of this exemption notification is the reduction of the value for assessment. The value of these goods under Section 14, which was determined on their importation into India continues uncharged during the period that is remained in the bonded warehouse. It is only for the purpose of assessment to duty that their value was determined by applying the criteria specified in the notification. If, for example, for any reason, the benefit of the notification was not claimed, or claimed but not granted, the value on which the duty calculated would be determined in the bill of entry which was filed for depositing the goods in a bonded warehouse. In other words, therefore, while the application of the notification requires determination of a notional value, that is not the value of the goods under Section 14 of the Act.

We do not find any ground into interference.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs Reliance Industries Ltd. Same Subject Land Acquisition