9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (5) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed upon a report from Asstt. Collector (Corr.), the Collector of Customs (Appeals) should have held that upon clearance from the warehouse any time on or after 1-3-1983 the impugned goods would be eligible for grant of exemption against the revised description of Sl. No. 76 of Notification No. 118/80-Cus., dated 19-6-1980, as amended by Notification No. 55/83-Cus., dated 1-3-1983. The final conclusion of the learned Collector of Customs (Appeals) that the description under Serial No. 76 of the notification aforesaid as it stood at the time of import of the impugned goods would determine the rate of duty is not sustainable in law. 2A. The additional evidences were the two ex-bond bills of entry under cover of which goods were cleared fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original and lower appellate authorities, the same cannot be allowed now. 5. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Television Receiver Sets. They placed orders for T.V. test pattern generator etc. with M/s. Philips, Holland and for the Modulator and Transmitter with M/s. Rhode and Schwartz, West Germany. They imported the items under two Bills of Entry. The T.V. Synch generator, monochrome test generator, test pattern generator were imported under Bill of Entry No. 206/16-11-82 and Modulator and Transmitters under Bill of Entry No. 101/06-10-1982. The Notification No. 118/80 under Sl. No. 76 allowed a concessional duty if all the three items figuring therein, were imported, which was interpreted by the department to mean th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd 16-11-1982 and at the relevant time the notification in force was 118/80, which did not extend the concession to the goods which had been imported under different consignments, and the order of the Asstt. Collector was correct, and the order-in-appeal was with reference to those goods which were in dispute before the Assistant Collector, which were for clearances for home consumption and against the order of the Assistant Collector the appellants went in appeal before the Collr. (Appeals). Therefore, the appeal before the Tribunal was subsequent to the altered situation when the goods have been warehoused and this situation was not before the Assistant Collector and as such the appeal before the Tribunal is redundant. 8. The submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ising of one or more of the items were eligible for the concession, the Collector (Appeals) was aware of the fact that the goods were warehoused. In their appeal memorandum before the Collector (Appeals) they have stated that the goods are in the licensed warehouse; therefore the Collector (Appeals) ought to have taken into consideration the changed circumstances and accordingly decided the appeal. Since the order of the Collector (Appeals) in upholding the order of the Assistant Collector which was under a different set of circumstances which did not prevail when the appeal was under consideration, in the interest of justice, he ought to have given a proper finding on the facts under the revised circumstances. His order with reference to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
