1990 (12) TMI 249 - Commissioner - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Exemption from payment of basic import duty under Notification No. 151/77-Cus., dated 15-7-1977
- Partial concession in respect of auxiliary duty under Notification No. 131/83-Cus., dated 13-5-1983
- Discrepancy in actual weight of imported melting scrap and manifested quantity
- Rejection of refund claims by Assistant Collector of Customs, Bhavnagar

Analysis:
The case involved three appeals by M/s. Panchmahal Steel Limited against the Order-in-original passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bhavnagar, regarding the exemption from import duty for using imported melting scrap in the manufacture of steel products. The exemption required an 'end-use' certificate to be produced. The appellants received three consignments of melting scrap in bulk cargo through the Port of Bhavnagar, but the actual weight was found to be less than the manifested quantity based on weighment slips certified by an independent surveyor.

The appellants argued that the manifested weight was approximate, based on draught survey, while the weight for which the 'end-use' certificate was furnished was based on actual weighment. They contended that there was no evidence of illegal disposal of the differential quantity and that the demands for duty were not proper. They also cited a letter from Bhavnagar Customs accepting weighment certificates by port authorities for cancellation of End Use Bond.

During the hearing, it was highlighted that similar appeals had been allowed by Collector (Appeals), Ahmedabad. The main issue was whether the manifested weight or the actual weight should be considered for discharging the 'end-use' bond for claiming the exemption. The judgment referred to a letter from the Assistant Collector, Customs, Bhavnagar, accepting physical weighments for cancellation of End Use Bonds.

The judgment concluded that since there was no weigh-bridge at Bhavnagar port initially, the actual weight supported by independent surveyor's weighment slips should be accepted. The Regional Iron & Steel Controller certified the material quantity received by the appellants, and there was no allegation of misappropriation. The port authorities accepted the surveyor's report, and in the absence of a weigh-bridge at the port, the actual weighment was deemed accurate. Thus, the refund claims were allowed, and the appeals were upheld.