9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 76,08,030/-. The goods were subjected to examination and the Gemological Institute of India after testing the samples vide their report dated 23/11/2012 replied that the goods cannot be described as rough diamonds and they are semi processed diamonds. Shri Naresh Mehta, Trade Panel Member, who also examined the goods, vide his report dated 08/11/2012 certified that "It is half process for cut and polishing diamonds. 1/3 work has been done. Rest of work finish with losing 20% weight of the stone." On the basis of this report, the appellant offered to pay the appropriate duty and paid duty of Rs. 1,56,725/- on 23/02/2013 and cleared the goods. The appellant also waived the requirement of show-cause notice. Thereafter on 30/04/2013 a pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ificate certifying that the goods under Importation are rough diamonds. The CBE&C vide circular No. 35/2009-Cus dated 29/12/2009 has clarified that "semi-Cut diamonds should be subjected to the requirement of production of certificate under the Kimberly Process certification scheme (KPCS) and also polishing a single or a few small facets will not transform rough diamonds into polished diamonds". On the basis of this clarification, it can be seen that the goods under importation are not polished diamonds meriting classification under heading 7102.39 as assessed by the Revenue. In any case, the appellant has discharged the duty liability and cleared the goods under importation on payment of duty and therefore, there is no loss of revenue caus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pert's opinion obtained with regard to the impugned goods, it is seen that the goods under importation are only semi-processed diamonds. Further, as per the HSN explanatory notes and the Board Circular dated 29/12/2009, they fall under the category of rough diamonds and not as cut and polished diamonds. The Kimberley Process Certificate produced by the importer appellant also certifies the product to be a rough diamond. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellant made any misdeclaration with regard to the description of the goods under importation. Therefore, the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(m) is without any basis. Further, the appellant has cleared the goods already on payment of duty and the goods are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
