9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . ORDER The appellant is an exporter of handicrafts. They imported PVC tray for packing the handicrafts, claiming exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., dated 1-3-2002. Serial No. 114 of the said notification grants exemption to "poly film used for shrink wrapping and cling wrapping of artwares." 2. The lower authorities have denied the exemption by observing that PVC tray imported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cating authority or before the first appellate authority. He submits that this being a legal issue, the appellant may be permitted to raise the same at this stage. 4. Countering the arguments, learned DR appearing for the Revenue opposes the prayer of the learned Advocate that Notification No. 104/94-Cus., dated 16-3-1994 granted exemption subject to fulfilment of certain procedure like exec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f export of the very same goods had already been raised before the original adjudicating authority. As such, as the facts are available on record it is only a legal claim of the notification which is now being raised for the first time. 6. After appreciating the submissions, we agree with the learned DR that this claim was not made before the authorities below. However, we feel that the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he lower authorities. However, the facts of export of the very same goods, which were imported by the appellant have to be established and identity of the imported and re-exported goods is required to be examined by the lower authorities, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for examining the appellant's claim of exemption of Notification No. 104/94-C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
