Page 188 - ELT_1st June 2020_VOL 372_Part 5th

722 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

law, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, interest and also imposed
penalty. Aggrieved by such order, appellant is now before the Tribunal.
2. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. Counsel Shri Hari Radhakrishnan
appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that the three allegations raised
in the Show Cause Notice as violation of condition of E.P.C.G. license is as
under :-
(i) That the vehicle was not registered as a tourist vehicle
(ii) That the foreign exchange has not been earned exclusively by use of
the vehicle
(iii) That no proper accounts were maintained by the appellant.
3. With regard to the first issue, Ld. Counsel submitted that there is no
such condition stipulated in the E.P.C.G. license that the vehicle has to be regis-
tered as a tourist taxi. Further, it is submitted by him that though the vehicle was
initially registered as a private vehicle in the name of the Managing Director of
the company, subsequently, the registration was changed to that of a tourist ve-
hicle. He adverted to the Circular No. 7/(RE-08)/2004-09, dated 7-5-2008 issued
by D.G.F.T. It was clarified in the Circular issued in 2008 that it is necessary to
endorse on the Bill of Entry that the vehicle has to be registered for tourist pur-
pose. The said circular is issued only on 7-5-2008 whereas the import in the pre-
sent case is in the year 2006. The circular also clarified that in past cases where
EODC has not been obtained till 30-6-2008 and where vehicles were not regis-
tered as tourist vehicle, the EPCG license holders will get the vehicles registered
as tourist vehicle before 31-8-2008. In the present case, the appellant was issued
the EODC only on 12-6-2018. Thus, the appellant has converted the registration
from private vehicle to tourist vehicle much before obtaining EODC and before
31-8-2008. Thus, this condition has been sufficiently complied.
4. He relied upon the decision in the cases of Narang International Hotels
P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva - 2017 (347) E.L.T. 680 (Tri. -
Mum.), Commissioner of Customs v. Air Travel Bureau Ltd. - 2010 (260) E.L.T. 78
(Del.) and Hotel Excelsior Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi - 2016 (336)
E.L.T. 116 (Tri. - Del.) to argue that when the EODC has been issued by the con-
cerned authority the proceedings alleging that conditions have been violated
cannot sustain.
5. The Ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi appeared and argued the matter on
behalf of the department.
6. Heard both sides.
7. The first and foremost issue is the violation of the condition that the
vehicle has not been registered as tourist vehicle. It is brought out from the facts
that the appellant has obtained registration under tourist category after the pro-
ceedings have been initiated. The D.G.F.T. vide Circular dated 7-5-2008 has clari-
fied as under :-
“Attention is invited to para 5.1 of Foreign Trade Policy wherein Import of
Motor Cars, Sports Utility Vehicles/all purpose vehicles are allowed only to
Hotels, Travel Agents, Tour Operators or Tour Transport Operators and
Companies owning/operating Golf Resorts.
2. In order to ensure proper and intended use of above vehicles under
EPCG Scheme, following course of action would be taken by EPCG author-
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st June 2020  188