Page 285 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

2020 ] SUBJECT INDEX 931
period - Revenue filed appeal only against the issue of setting aside of
demand - HELD : Appeal has already been decided on merits in favour
of assessee by this Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/12699/2018 so,
appeal filed by Revenue do not sustain and hence dismissed - Customs
Tariff Act, 1975 — Commr. of Cus., Ahmedabad v. Modern Communication and
Broadcast Systems Pvt. Ltd. (Tri. - Ahmd.) .......................... 80
Engineering and designing fee on import under Turnkey projects, when not
includible in assessable value - See under VALUATION (CUSTOMS) ..... 478
Enhancement of declared value, speaking order required to be issued - See
under ADJUDICATION .............................. 400
— of value on basis of contemporary imports of similar goods from same
supplier by PSU when not sustainable - See under VALUATION
(CUSTOMS) ..................................... 279
Enquiry not conducted before revoking Courier Agency licence, order not
sustainable - See under COURIER AGENCY LICENCE ............. 696
Enzymes - Imported inactive dried yeast - Classification under Chapter 23 of
Central Excise Tariff - Material purchased and used for poultry feed
supplement - HELD : Heading 2102 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975, covers
yeasts (active or inactive) and as per test reports of CRCL, impugned
goods are inactive yeast - Assessee’s argument that imported goods not
fit for human consumption, hence do not fall under Heading 2102 ibid
unacceptable, as yeast declared not fit for human consumption, not
excluded from impugned Heading 2102 ibid - Entire Chapter 23 ibid,
talks of preparations of a kind used in animal feeding however
impugned products imported not preparations of kind animal feeding -
Item cannot be classified along with animal feed merely by virtue of
inclusive definition given in explanatory notes for Heading 2309 of
Central Excise Tariff - Also, when yeast having specific mention under
Heading 2102 ibid, item cannot be classified under any other heading -
Classification arrived by department and upheld by Commissioner
(Appeals) to be consistent with relevant chapter heading and notes and
also general interpretative rules for classification - Classification of
impugned goods under Tariff Item 2102 20 00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975
correctly arrived at by Revenue — Zymonutrients Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of
Customs, Chennai (Tri. - Chennai) ............................ 458
EPCG Licence - Natural justice violated on rejecting request of extension of
EPCG Licence without personal hearing - See under EXIM ........... 330
EPCG Scheme for import of luxury cars, scope of conditions thereof - See
under CARS ..................................... 721
— Scope of proceedings by Customs Department on non-fulfillment of
export obligation when DGFT’s order is in favour of assessee - See under
EXIM......................................... 847
Ethanol blended with Motor Spirit not amounting to ‘manufacture’ - See
under MANUFACTURE .............................. 414
Evasion of duty on Gold, bail granted to accused - See under BAIL ........ 830
Evidence - Acquittal of accused for Customs offence justified in absence of
independent corroboration or evidence especially after retraction of
Statement - See under PROSECUTION ...................... 527
— Clandestine removal - Electronic evidence - Pen drive data is not
substantial evidence, especially in absence of evidence how extra
consideration was given and received by assessee - Demand for
clandestine removal based on undervaluation set aside — Principal
Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise v. Shah Foils Ltd. (Guj.) ............... 632
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  285