Mineral Enterprises Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (CESTAT Bangalore)
Mineral Enterprises Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (CESTAT Bangalore) revolves around an appeal filed by Mineral Enterprises Limited (the appellant), a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU), against two orders: Order-in-Appeal No. 170/2016-CE AU-I dated 7.11.2016 and Order-in-Appeal No.106/2017-CE dated 07.03.2017. The appeal concerns the importation and subsequent destruction of a power screen track mounted screening plant T Chieftain by a mob of villagers.
The appellant had imported the screening plant, valued at Rs.78,12,454/-, in 2006. Despite being permitted by the Development Commissioner in 2007 to debond the capital goods, the appellant had not done so. In 2008, a mob of villagers attacked the appellant’s premises and burned the capital goods. Following this incident, the goods were debonded, cleared as scrap, and relevant duties were paid. However, in 2012, a notice was issued demanding differential duty on the original capital goods, which was confirmed by the Original Authority and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).
The appellant contested the imposition of duty, arguing that the show-cause notices invoking extended periods under the Customs Act, 1962 were not sustainable. They also contended that the order went beyond the scope of the show-cause notice by confirming the demand under a different section of the Act. The appellant further argued that they had complied with customs procedures by obtaining permission to clear the burnt capital goods and paying duty accordingly. They cited relevant decisions and correspondence with the authorities as evidence of their compliance.
