We taking note of the fact that Commissioner had relied upon the three test reports and had come to the conclusion and the expert opinion if it would have produced at that stage would have been of some help to the Commissioner also. Strangely, in the miscellaneous application the appellants submitted that there were certain reasons which prevented them to produce the documents on record during the course of hearing but did not clarified what were the reasons prevented them to produce this opinion on record.
Limited - 1995 (79) ELT 477 (Tribunal) and in the case the case of Jain Exports Pvt. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of United Machinery Works Pvt. Learned DR on the other hand opposed on the ground that this was not produced before the original adjudicating authority with the copies of the test reports. It was submitted by the learned advocate these PV taken on record to consider. It was explained by the learned advocate that the three test reports received from CRCL, BPCL and GFSL do not clearly says what exactly the product is and therefore, they obtained the expert opinion who had considered all the three test reports. Before we proceed to consider the issues involved in this case, it is necessary to consider the miscellaneous application filed by the appellants for submissions of additional evidences in the form of opinion of Dr. Further, penalties were imposed on seven firms/ persons and all of them are in appeal.Ĥ. In the impugned order, Commissioner has held that imported goods are correctly classifiable under CTH 27101990 and has confiscated the goods and allowed the same to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. Further, penalties on various persons/ firms involved were also proposed to be imposed.ģ. During the course of investigation statements of representatives of various firms concerned were recorded, premises were searched, samples were got tested by laboratories, documents were recovered and after completion of investigation a show cause notice was issued proposing to confiscate the goods imported, reclassifying the same under CTH 27101990 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as against CTH 2709 claimed by the noticees, demanding differential duty on the goods as per provisional assessment resorted to. Representative samples of the goods imported per above vessel were drawn on (on board) and on and again on from the tank farm.Ģ. As it was felt that goods were mis-declared, the same were detained on at tank farm Nos. Samchira FZE dated addressed to the owners of MT Nolowati whereas the mate receipt dated issued at Bandar Mahshahr did not mention any description about the goods. A scrutiny of documents available on board and with the master of the vessel revealed that description of goods was described therein as (i) Naphtha (ii) Naphtha (or equivalent to Condensate) (iii) Condensate (Naphtha) (iv) Naphtha (Condensate) in the documents namely stowage plan dated, dead weight statement dated, cargo report ullage reports dated and, cargo operation plan check dated, letter from M/s. Kiran Road Lines, Gandhidham under his letter dated filed an application before Deputy Commissioner, Customs, Kandla seeking permission for examination and discharge of the goods pending filing of bills of entry. World Link TC Bond Store, Gandhidham as notified parties. F-634 dated with Custom House, Kandla clearing 7212.305 MT goods declared as Condensate. Limited, Gandhidham, (VSPL for short) had viled IGM No.
0 kommentar(er)
