2001 (10) TMI 609

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. The appellant imported a consignment consisting of hydraulic ironing machine, which was shipped on 15-9-1993 arrived at Bombay port on 12-10-1993. In the bill of entry that it filed for the clearance of its consignment, the importer claimed the benefit of exemption contained in Notification 160/92. This notification exempts from duty capital goods .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aim for the exemption. The department did not accept this contention on the ground that the goods have already been cleared on payment of duty from the customs. Notice was issued proposing to demand duty in full and confiscate the goods. After considering the cause shown, the Collector passed orders denying the benefit of notification, demanding the duty payable and holding that the goods were lia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se, they have been cleared. The decision of the Tribunal in Ester Industries Ltd. v. CC - 1995 (75) E.L.T. 635 which the appellant relies upon has to be distinguished on facts. The Tribunal in that decision said that the licence was valid for the goods which had been shipped or arrived prior to the issue of the endorsement. The endorsement of the licensing authority in the case before us is differ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X