9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 728X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntire quantification confirmed by the adjudicating authority is totally incorrect and the matter has to be remanded back to the adjudicating authority for correct quantification. - C/292/2010 - A/468/2011-WZB/C-I(CSTB) - Dated:- 4-10-2011 - S/Shri Ashok Jindal, P.R. Chandrasekharan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri V.M. Doiphode, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Prabhakar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (T)]. The appeal and stay application are directed against order-in-original No. 08/2010/CAC/zCC(I)/ SHH/Gr.VB dated 19-1-2010 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Import), New Customs House, Mumbai. 2. The facts arising for consideration in this are as follows :- 2.1 The appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meanwhile, the appellant filed a miscellaneous application for rectification of mistake against the order of the Tribunal on the ground that the appellants are eligible for duty exemption under Notification No. 65/88-Cus., dated 1-3-88 which fact has not been considered in the order dated 30-4-2008. The miscellaneous application was allowed vide order dated 27-1-2009 wherein the matter was remanded to the Commissioner to consider the claim of the appellant for exemption under Notification No. 65/88-Cus. In pursuance thereto, the Commissioner has passed the impugned order. The Commissioner has found the appellant to be eligible for benefit of Notification No. 65/88 and accordingly ordered for recovery of duty amounting to Rs. 60,85,786/- fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be set aside. 4. To a specific query from the Bench, the Ld. Counsel submits that the goods were released to the appellants under a supurdnama dated 24-9-98. 5. The Ld. A.R. appearing for the Revenue submits that there are errors committed in the computation of duty and prays that matter be remanded. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submission. 7. Inasmuch as the Commissioner has found that the appellants are eligible for benefit of Notification No. 65/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988, it was his bounden duty to extend the benefit accruing to the importer on account of said exemption vide Notification No. 140/90-Cus., dated 20-3-1990 in respect of auxiliary duty of Customs leviable under the Finance Act. Further, Notification No. 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
