Sangam Fashion Pvt Ltd @Hash C.C.-Ahmedabad

Shri S. Suriyanarayanan, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that in the original order as well as the impugned order the

demand was confirmed on the ground of the appellant has not fulfilled the export obligation in case of import of goods under EPCG License. He

submits that at the time of hearing before the adjudicating authority he made a submission that the appellant is pursuing the matter with DGFT for the

fulfilment of EODC and asked for the time, but the adjudicating authority without waiting for the same passed the adjudication order. He submits that

now after passing of the order by the Commissioner (Appeals) they have received EODC which could not be considered by both the lower

authorities.

Shri Sanjiv Kinker, Learned Superintendent (AR) appearing for the revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. He also submits that

during the time of adjudication the license was also lost and they procured duplicate copy of the license from DGFT.

We have considered the submission made by both the sides. We find that the entire case is on the ground that appellant in respect of import under

EPCG have not fulfilled the export obligation. However, now as per the submission of the learned counsel the EODC issued by DGFT was obtained

only after passing of the impugned order. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the entire matter should be reconsidered by the adjudicating

authority in the light of the EODC issued by the DGFT.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority, all the issues are kept open. The

adjudicating authority shall pass a Denovo order within 3 Months from the date of this order.

(Dictated & Pronounced in the open court)