Case Law Details
Bisco Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that provisions of section 71 of the Customs Act doesn’t apply when goods were not warehoused inside the notified public bonded warehouse but were unloaded outside the notified area but within factory premises and kept under a shed on permission granted by Superintended.
Facts- Appellant imported in all 595 cases of machinery parts which were required to be warehoused in the notified public bonded warehouse. Based on information, the officials of the respondent had searched the industrial premises of the appellant including the notified public bonded warehouse. In the course of the search, the stock lying within the notified public bonded warehouse were verified. On such verification, only 304 cases were found lying inside the warehouse; 264 cases were found outside the warehouse but within the industrial/factory premises of the appellant; remaining 27 cases were not found either inside the warehouse or outside the warehouse within the industrial/factory premises.
Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant as well as to the warehouse keeper by the Collector (now the Commissioner). Commissioner by his adjudication order did not accept the reply of the appellant and confirmed the demand and interest.
The matter was taken up by the Commissioner afresh on remand. By a detailed order dated 28.04.2005, the Commissioner gave various directions. It was against this order that the related appeal was filed by the appellant before the CESTAT. By the impugned order dated 30.04.2009, CESTAT dismissed the appeal. Hence the present appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
