Page 226 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

616 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

2.2 The appellant purchased 47,000 tons of legally mined beach miner-
als during 2015 from M/s. Transworld Garnet India (P) Ltd., 100% EOU, Andhra
Pradesh, who are licensed to mine beach sand minerals in Andhra Pradesh by
the Department of Mines & Geology, Andhra Pradesh. In the present case, 10,000
MT of Garnet was purchased in Andhra Pradesh by the appellant and moved
under Bulk Permits and individual Transit Passes (500 in number) issued by the
concerned authorities of Andhra Pradesh Department of Mines & Geology to
their processing unit at Vallanvilai (100% EOU) in Tamil Nadu. Appellant re-
ceived and rewarehoused in their 100% EOU at Vallanvilai vide Truckwise
summary certified by Range Superintendent of Central Excise who is incharge of
100% EOU. After processing the above goods were moved to appellants licensed
additional location at Tuticorin (100% EOU) and duly rewarehoused and certi-
fied by the Tuticorin Central Excise authorities. Out of the 10,000 MTs of fully
processed Garnet Abrasive Grit Grade, 2,930 MTs were moved from the appel-
lants additional location at Tuticorin to Cochin Port for export under AREs. Out
of 2930 MTs of Garnet, 1300 MTs were already exported from Cochin Port and
balance 1630 MTs are remained kept in CFS at Cochin. The appellant filed Ship-
ping Bill No. 2707832 dated 8-12-2016 for export of 1,40,000 kgs of SG Garnet
Abrasive Grit Grade - D+ and the value declared was Rs. 17,99,280/- and these
goods were transported to Cochin Port for export under AE3 and Export Invoic-
es. In the meantime on 22-12-2016, Trade Facility No. 13/2016, dated 22-12-2016
was issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Custom House, Cochin wherein it
was directed to verify the source of beach minerals brought for export to Cus-
toms area. The appellant vide their letter dated 28-12-2016 informed the Com-
missioner of Customs, Cochin that the minerals have been purchased from An-
dhra Pradesh and have been moved already to Tamil Nadu processing unit of
the appellant with all permissions and transport permits issued by Director of
Mines, Andhra Pradesh and local Collector’s permits is not required. Thereafter,
Assistant Commissioner vide letter dated 3-1-2017 required the appellant to pro-
duce certificate documents certifying the legal source of beach sand minerals and
transport permits from the concerned District Collector under Section 50 of the
Customs Act, 1962. Thereafter the appellant filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No.
650/2017 before the High Court of Kerala on 6-1-2017 to quash the Trade Facility
No. 13/2016 issued by the Commissioner of Customs vide their letter dated
22-12-2016. The writ petition was dismissed by the High Court of Kerala vide
judgment dated 26-7-2018 holding that the petitioner is at liberty to export his
goods as soon as he is able to satisfy the authorities on the legal source of miner-
als. In the meantime, DGFT issued Notification No. 26/2015-2020, dated 21-8-
2018 canalising the export of Beach Sand Minerals through M/s. Indian Rare
Earths Limited. As a result of this notification, the appellant could not export the
impugned Garnet sand and thereafter the appellant vide letter dated 1-3-2019
made a request to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs to allow them to take
back the cargo from the CFS to their bonded warehouse at Tuticorin, Tamil Na-
du. The Commissioner of Customs forwarded the request of the appellant to the
District Collector of Tirunelveli District who in turn did not permit the move-
ment of the goods to the SEZ of the appellant at Visakhapatnam or to Tamil Na-
du. As per the appellant, the District Collector, Tirunelveli is not competent au-
thority to permit the movement of minerals lying at Cochin Port to SEZ unit at
Andhra Pradesh in respect of minerals legally mined and sourced from Andhra
Pradesh. The Assistant Commissioner vide letter dated 28-6-2019 informed that
the request to take back the cargo could not be considered. Thereafter a show
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  226