2007 (7) TMI 498 - AT - Customs

Exemption - Re-import - Refund - Exemption - Claim thereto - Held that - It appears that, when the goods were originally cleared for export that was without payment of central excise duty and was against execution of a bond. It appears from the examination report that the conditions for the benefit of the Notification were fulfilled by the appellants. The goods re-imported by them were found to be the same as the one earlier exported by them. The goods were found to be of Indian origin - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of refund claim for lack of evidence of identity of imported goods with exported goods.
2. Claiming benefit of Customs Notification No. 94/96 after clearance.
3. Admissibility of exemption under Notification for re-imported goods.

Analysis:

1. The appellants exported a consignment of oil seals which were later returned by the buyers for not meeting specifications. The returned goods were cleared without claiming the benefit of Customs Notification No. 94/96. The refund claim subsequently filed by the appellants was rejected due to lack of evidence of the identity of the imported goods with the exported ones. The lower authorities emphasized the absence of proof that the imported goods matched the exported ones, even disregarding a xerox copy of the examination report. However, a detailed examination report by the assessing officer confirmed the identity of the goods, stating they were the same as exported and of Indian origin.

2. The Tribunal noted that the appellants did not specifically claim the benefit of the Notification at the time of clearance for re-import. Despite this, the Tribunal held that the benefit of an exemption Notification should not be denied solely for not claiming it during clearance if otherwise admissible. The appellants' claim fell under Sl. No. 1(d) of the Notification, exempting goods originally exported and re-imported from certain duties. The examination report confirmed the fulfillment of conditions for the Notification's benefit, as the goods were found to be the same as the exported ones and of Indian origin. The Tribunal concluded that the benefit should have been allowed to the assessee.

3. Considering the above factors, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants. The decision highlighted the importance of fulfilling the conditions for exemption under the Notification, even if not explicitly claimed during clearance. The detailed examination report played a crucial role in establishing the identity and origin of the goods, leading to the Tribunal's decision in favor of granting the benefit of the Notification to the appellants.