2018 (4) TMI 1113 - AT - Customs

Import of restricted item - natural rubber - case of Revenue is that that natural rubber could be imported only through the port of Kolkata and Vishakhapatnam and also that natural rubber was not allowed for importation without payment of duty for 100% EOU scheme - Held that - Id. Commissioner has held that the test report relied upon by the original authority was not in respect of the goods in question and that the samples from the goods in question were not drawn and sent to the laboratory and that the original authority has relied upon test report in respect of samples drawn from some other consignment - also the SCN was clearly time-barred. There is no ground raised by Revenue to argue as to how the finding of Id. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order-in-appeal is not sustainable - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order-in-Appeal No. 214/BK/GGN/2012 dated 30.05.2012 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Customs Central Excise, Delhi-III, at Gurgaon.

Analysis:

1. Issue of Goods Declaration and Import Restrictions:
The respondent imported goods declared as natural rubber Latex 60% DRC for use in 100% EOU. Two show cause notices dated 04.11.2003 were issued, alleging that the goods were natural rubber, subject to import restrictions. The original authority, relying on a test report, confirmed duty demand and imposed penalties. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, citing that the test report was not for the goods in question and the notices were time-barred.

2. Legal Arguments and Counter-Arguments:
During the hearing, the Revenue acknowledged that the test report was for identical goods, while the respondent's counsel argued that the report did not apply to the current consignment. The Tribunal considered these contentions and found no grounds for the Revenue to challenge the Commissioner's findings, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

3. Final Decision and Relief Granted:
After reviewing the arguments and records, the Tribunal concluded that the Revenue's appeal lacked merit, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision. The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was entitled to consequential relief as per law. The cross-objection was also disposed of during the proceedings.

This judgment highlights the importance of accurate goods declaration in imports, the relevance of test reports, and the significance of adhering to legal timelines in issuing show cause notices. The decision emphasizes the need for substantial evidence to support duty demands and penalties, ensuring fair adjudication in customs cases.