Page 219 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

2020 ] HIGHLINK EXPORTERS PVT. LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, DELHI 553

would mean that the Legislature has visualized the case of non-fulfilment of ex-
port obligation, which drives an assessee to paragraph 4.50 of the HBP whereby
the payment of duty has been prescribed in case of bona fide default in export ob-
ligation, which also takes care of voluntary payment of duty with interest as
well. Admittedly, the inputs imported have gone into the manufacture of goods
meant for export, but the export did not take place. At best, the appellant could
have availed the Cenvat credit, but that would not ipso facto give them any right
to claim refund of such credit in cash with the onset of GST because CENVAT is
an option available to an assessee to be exercised and the same cannot be en-
forced by the CESTAT at this stage.
12. There is no question of refund and therefore, I do not see any im-
pediment in the impugned order.
13. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
(Order pronounced in the open Court on 5-2-2020)
_______

2020 (373) E.L.T. 553 (Tri. - Del.)
IN THE CESTAT, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
[COURT NO. II]
Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (J)
HIGHLINK EXPORTERS PVT. LTD.
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, DELHI

Final Order No. A/50396/2020-SM(BR), dated 3-2-2020 in Appeal No.
C/50099/2019
Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty - Import of Cosmetics at
Garhi Harsaru ICD - Sticking MRP stickers prior to release - Confiscation pro-
ceedings on the ground that aforesaid ICD is not notified Port of Import of
said items imported without MRP stickers, not sustainable - ICD at Garhi
Harsaru falls under jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Patparganj
which is a Notified Port - Further, there is no legal prohibition in sticking
MRP stickers prior to out of charge by Customs, which has been done in this
case - Impugned order of confiscation, redemption fine and penalty set aside -
Sections 111 and 112 of Customs Act, 1962. [para 4]
Appeal allowed
REPRESENTED BY : Ms. Vibha Narang, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Shri Y. Singh, Authorised Representative, for the
Respondent.
[Order]. - The appellant is an importer who has imported Deodor-
ant/perfumes vide Bill of Entry No. 3616746, dated 13-10-2017. As per the bill of
lading, the port of discharge is Nava Sheva and place of delivery is ICD, Garhi
Harsaru, which comes under the Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Patparganj.
Vide the impugned order-in-appeal, the Commissioner has upheld the confisca-
tion of the goods and order for release of the goods on payment of redemption

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  219