Skip to content


Phil Marketing Services Pvt Ltd. and Others Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On
Case Number Appeal Nos. C/292 to 295/08 (Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 2/Commr/Goa/Cus/2007 dated 26
Judge
AppellantPhil Marketing Services Pvt Ltd. and Others
RespondentCommissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa
Advocates:For the Appellants : Naresh Thacker with Mohan Salian, Advocates. For the Respondent : Navneet, Additional Commissioner (A.R).
Excerpt:
.....fine was also imposed. penalty on the appellant and on other three appellants, namely m/s phil corporation ltd, mr. s.h. kothari and mr. k.d. bhat are also imposed. aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before us. 2. mr. naresh thacker, the learned counsel for the appellant before us and submitted that in this case as the assessments were finalized at the time of clearance of the goods and the show cause notice has been issued after more than six months of the assessments and clearance of the goods, therefore, demands are not sustainable on limitation. 3. on merits also, he has submitted that after clearing the goods by the appellant from the customs the goods were cleared to m/s phil corporation ltd, who undertook the process of repacking and labeling and after the.....
Judgment:

Ashok Jindal

1. The appellant M/s Phil Marketing Services Ltd imported film rolls in bulk and filed Bills of Entry. All the assessments were made finally and the goods were cleared on payment of CVD as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Later on, it came to the notice of the Revenue that as these films are meant for retail sale, therefore, the appellant is required to make the payment of CVD as per Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. A Show Cause Notice dated 31.3.2006 was issued and the same was adjudicated and the appellant was asked to pay additional customs duty, the goods were held liable for confiscation and accordingly redemption fine was also imposed. Penalty on the appellant and on other three appellants, namely M/s Phil Corporation Ltd, Mr. S.H. Kothari and Mr. K.D. Bhat are also imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before us.

2. Mr. Naresh Thacker, the learned counsel for the appellant before us and submitted that in this case as the assessments were finalized at the time of clearance of the goods and the Show Cause Notice has been issued after more than six months of the assessments and clearance of the goods, therefore, demands are not sustainable on limitation.

3. On merits also, he has submitted that after clearing the goods by the appellant from the Customs the goods were cleared to M/s Phil Corporation Ltd, who undertook the process of repacking and labeling and after the said process the goods were cleared on payment of Central Excise duty on MRP as per Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, they have rightly discharged their duty liability as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

4. He has further submitted that in this case the demand of differential duty is confirmed to Rs. 1,70,46,113/- and the total duty paid by M.s Phil Corporation Ltd is Rs. 1,81,44,323/-.

5. Heard the learned Additional Commissioner (A.R) for the Revenue.

6. In this case it is admitted position that the goods were imported by the appellant in bulk and cleared for further process to M/s Phil Corporation Ltd who undertook the process of packing, repacking, labeling and putting stickers of MRP which is process of manufacturing as per Section 2 (f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and M/s Phil Corporation Ltd cleared these goods on payment of Central excise duty as per Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

7. In view of these observations, we find that the appellants are not required to pay CVD at the time of importation of the goods as per Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the impugned order. The impugned order is set aside and the appeals filed by the appellants are allowed with consequential reliefs (if any).


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //