Page 136 - ELT_1_1st April 2020_Vol 372_Part

22 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

29. Under paragraph 9.17(b), the EOU/EPZ units are also entitled to
undertake job work for export, on behalf of DTA units, with the permission of
Assistant Commissioner of Customs, provided the goods are exported direct
from the EOU/EPZ units and for such exports, the DTA units will be entitled for
refund of duty paid on the inputs by way of Brand Rate of duty drawback.
30. It can thus clearly be seen, that paragraph 9.9(b) and paragraph
9.17(b) of the EXIM Policy operate in totally different fields. Under paragraph
9.9(b), an EOU is entitled to sell upto 50% of the FOB value of exports to DTA
subject to payment of applicable duties and fulfilment of minimum NFEP as pre-
scribed in Appendix-I of the Policy, whereas under paragraph 9.17(b), an EOU is
entitled to undertake job work for export, on behalf of DTA units, with the per-
mission of Assistant Commissioner of Customs, provided the goods are exported
direct from the EOU/EPZ units. In such type of exports, the DTA units would be
entitled for refund of duty paid on the inputs by way of Brand Rate of duty
drawback.
31. The order-in-original states that since the UFAC has not exported
the final product of Manganese raw material received by it from TISCO, it had
violated the provisions of paragraphs 9.17(b) and 9.9(b) of the EXIM Policy. We
will have to examine the correctness of the said finding. For that, it will also be
relevant to examine as to whether under paragraph 9.9(b) of the EXIM Policy, an
EOU is entitled to carry a job work on behalf of another unit in DTA.
32. The order-in-original refers to Circular No. 67/98-Cus., dated 14-9-
1998 and Circular No. 74/99-Cus., dated 5-11-1999. However, the Commissioner,
it appears, that while passing the order has not noticed the subsequent Circular
No. 49/2000-Cus., dated 22-5-2000. It will be relevant to refer to paragraphs 10
and 11 of the said Circular dated 22-5-2000.
“10. Under para 9.17(d), the EOU/EPZ units in specific sectors were al-
lowed to undertake job work for export on behalf of DTA units. This para-
graph has been amended to extend this facility to all sectors. It has also
been provided that DTA units shall be entitled to brand rate of duty draw-
back.
11. The EOU/EPZ units in textiles, ready made garments and granite sec-
tors were allowed to undertake job work on behalf of DTA units by Board’s
Circular 69/98-Cus., dated 14th September, 1998. This facility was subse-
quently extended to the EOU/EPZ units in aquaculture, animal husbandry,
hardware, software sector vide Board’s Circular No. 74/99-Cus., dated 5th
Nov., 1999. Now, it has been decided to extend this facility to EOU/EPZ units in
all sectors. Further, it has been decided that the DTA units shall be entitled to avail
of the brand rate of duty drawback for such job work undertaken by EOUs/EPZ
units concerned. Board’s Circulars 67/98-Cus., dated 14-9-1998 and 74/99-Cus.,
dated 511-1999 stand modified to the above extent.”
(emphasis supplied)
33. In view of paragraph 10 of the Circular dated 22-5-2000, the facility
of undertaking job work by EOU/EPZ units which was restricted to specific sec-
tors has been amended and the said facility has been extended to all sectors. It
has also been provided, that DTA units shall be entitled to brand rate of duty
drawback. Similarly, paragraph 11 of the Circular dated 22-5-2000 also provides,
that the facility which was given to EOU/EPZ to undertake job work on behalf of
DTA units in textiles, readymade garments and granite sectors which was subse-
quently extended to the EOU/EPZ units in aquaculture, animal husbandry,
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st April 2020  184