9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emanded Rs. 1,18,179/- as customs duty short-levied on Steel Melting scrap imported by the appellants. Duty demand consists of Rs. 1,12,977/- in respect of Special Additional duty and Rs. 5,202/- on goods found in excess. The order has also demanded interest and imposed penalty equivalent to the duty demand. 3. The ground for making demand of special additional duty is that the appellants had sold the imported melting scrap to buyers located in an area where no tax is chargeable on sale or purchase of goods. The duty demand in respect of the excess goods is on the ground that appellants had cleared 1.68 MTs of melting scrap over and above the declared quantity. 4. During the hearing of the case, the learned Counsel for the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n error in believing that the place to which the sale had been made, is the relevant factor under Notification No. 22/99. The relevant factor was only place from where sales take place. The learned Counsel submitted that the duty demand has been made on a complete misunderstanding of the legal position. 6. With regard to the quantity held to be imported in excess, the learned Counsel pointed out that no excess quantity had been found at the time of clearance of the goods. The excess has been alleged by comparing the sale quantity with imported quantity. The learned Counsel submitted that such a finding is not reasonable because the difference can be on account of errors in weighment during sale of the goods. The learned Counsel pointe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en given under the Sales tax Act in respect of certain transactions and such exemptions for specified cases would not make the place "an area where no duty is chargeable on sale and purchase of goods". We do not find any merit in the finding of excess quantity also. The quantity itself is very negligible. Further, this has been arrived at by comparing the sales quantity with the imported quantity. The difference is only notional as and no excess quantity was found on weighment of goods at the time of clearance. The demand on this count is therefore, not sustainable.
9. In view of what has been stated above, the appeal is allowed after setting aside the impugned order. The appellant shall be entitled to consequential relief, if any. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
