Lacure Pharmaceuticals Vs. Commissioner of Customs,

Lacure Pharmaceuticals vs Commissioner of Customs,

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Dec 14, 2001

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/27005

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/27005
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Dec 14, 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

Lacure Pharmaceuticals

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs,

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(79)ECC753

Excerpt

.....has been confirmed on quantity of 1250 kgs. of riboflavin by denying the benefit in terms of notification 59/97. the benefit of notification has been denied on the ground that the raw material imported by the applicants cannot be used in the manufacture of vitamins, pro-vitamins or other medicaments falling under chapter 30 of the schedule to the customs tariff act as they are suitable only for use as feed supplements. in addition to the duty amount penalty of rs. 1,20,000/- has been imposed.3. it is the submission of the applicants that the benefit of notification cannot be denied since under the notification the assistant commissioner has to be subsequently satisfied that the goods imported were used in the manufacture of the goods for which the applicant hold a licence. further the development commissioner had given permission to import the item in question namely vitamin b-2 feed grade for their 100% export oriented unit. he submits that 50% of the consignment imported are still lying with the department and this would safeguard the interest of the revenue and pray for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.4. the learned dr opposes the prayer for waiver and submits that it is very clear that the goods imported cannot be used in the manufacture of the goods for which the applicants possess a license, and therefore the duty demand has rightly been confirmed and penalty imposed.5. without going into the merit of the matter relating to availability of exemption under the notification in question, having regard to the fact that approximately rs. 13 lakhs worth of goods are still available with the department we hold that the applicants are not required to pre-deposit any amount. accordingly we dispense with the pre-deposit of duty and penalty and stay the recovery thereof pending the appeal.6. having regard to the nature of the item in question namely, vitamins, which will get deteriorated if they were further delayed, we fix the appeal for hearing on 15^th.....

Full Judgment

1. Application for retention of this appeal in Mumbai is allowed since the registered office and factory of the applicant is situated within the jurisdiction of the Western Zonal Bench.

2. Now we take up the stay application. Duty demand of Rs. 9,47,852/- has been confirmed on quantity of 1250 Kgs. of Riboflavin by denying the benefit in terms of Notification 59/97. The benefit of notification has been denied on the ground that the raw material imported by the applicants cannot be used in the manufacture of vitamins, pro-vitamins or other medicaments falling under Chapter 30 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act as they are suitable only for use as feed supplements. In addition to the duty amount penalty of Rs. 1,20,000/- has been imposed.

3. It is the submission of the applicants that the benefit of notification cannot be denied since under the notification the Assistant Commissioner has to be subsequently satisfied that the goods imported were used in the manufacture of the goods for which the applicant hold a licence. Further the Development Commissioner had given permission to import the item in question namely Vitamin B-2 feed grade for their 100% Export Oriented Unit. He submits that 50% of the consignment imported are still lying with the department and this would safeguard the interest of the Revenue and pray for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.

4. The learned DR opposes the prayer for waiver and submits that it is very clear that the goods imported cannot be used in the manufacture of the goods for which the applicants possess a license, and therefore the duty demand has rightly been confirmed and penalty imposed.

5. Without going into the merit of the matter relating to availability of exemption under the notification in question, having regard to the fact that approximately Rs. 13 lakhs worth of goods are still available with the department we hold that the applicants are not required to pre-deposit any amount. Accordingly we dispense with the pre-deposit of duty and penalty and stay the recovery thereof pending the appeal.

6. Having regard to the nature of the item in question namely, vitamins, which will get deteriorated if they were further delayed, we fix the appeal for hearing on 15^th January, 2002.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Lacure Pharmaceuticals vs Commissioner of Customs, Same Subject Land Acquisition