9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (8) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of guess work and weighment on the basis of out turn report given by Bhavnagar Port based on draught weight of the imported bulk cargo should be accepted and that benefit of Notification No. 151/77-Cus., dated 15-7-1977 as amended by Notification 35/82, dated 28-2-1982 he made available to the Respondent. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent imported melting scrap of iron or steel at Bhavnagar Port. The IGM of the vessel showed that a quantity of 3299.500 MT per MV. AGORES. The quantity of the bill of entry was supported by certificate of inspection, certificate of weight, certificate of origin, invoice, bill of lading, certificate of sale by MSTC and quantities shown in IGM. The quantity was never disputed by the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the weight could not have any nexus with the actual weighment of metal scrap which alone could be utilised by the importer s mini steel plant. He therefore held that the respondent was entitled to the benefit of notification. Hence the present appeal. 3. It is contended by the department that the respondent had not produced end use certificate in full quantity. Therefore the demand confirmed by the Assistant Collector is correct. It is argued by the department that the reasons advanced by the Collector (Appeals) that there could be no nexus obviously between the draft weighment of the imported metal scrap with that of the actual melting scrap utilised in the electric arc furnace since at the time melting scrap is discharged fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the electric arc furnace then the rate of duty will be nil. Here the draught survey shows that they had cleared 4378.500 and 3299.500 MT of the scrap. The actual end use certificate discloses a quantity of 4364.095 and 3266.755 showing a difference of 14.255 and 32.745 MT of quantities. The argument of the Collector (Appeals) is as indicated above however he failed to take note of the certificate given by the Ministry of Steel and Mines regarding end use. This shows that the actual quantity received was less than what it was claimed. This the Collector (Appeals) has failed to take note of. It is also to be stated that the Collector (Appeals) has sought to rely on the practice followed in Mumbai and Kandla Ports which in our view may not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
