9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 796X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoms Act, which was already sanctioned to the respondent after the due verification could be reopened subsequently without contesting the original assessment. The main contest was to the identity of the imported goods, which was established at the time of reexport from the evidence which were before the authorities. There were examination reports where the authorities had compared the, weight, size, marks and numbers with respect of bills of entry and concluded beyond doubt that those were the cases of re-export. The Tribunal, therefore, was right in holding that once having accepted that the identification of the imports goods was duly verified, the reopening was not sustainable. No opportunity was made available for the cross-examinat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CESTAT ):- (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the CESTAT was right in holding that drawback claimed under sec.74 of the Customs Act, 1962, once sanctioned to the appellant after due verification can be reopened subsequently without contesting the original assessments made? (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the CESTAT was right in allowing the DBK claims though investigation showed that it was difficult to differentiate the Flanges Indigenously manufactured from those imported by the assessee? 4. Although two questions are raised, they are being decided commonly as the facts are intertwined. 5. We have heard Dr. Amee Yagnik, learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adjudicating authority in order in original dated 31.12.2008 held in favour of the Revenue and confirmed the demand as raised in the show cause notice. 9. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred the appeals before CESTAT, which allowed the appeals of the assessee, and therefore, the present appeals raising aforementioned substantial questions of law. 10. On having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and having also having gone through the record and the entire material made available to us for the reasons to follow hereinafter, we see no reason to interfere with the order passed by CESTAT. 11. Firstly, this is not the case where any perversity could be pointed out giving rise to the substantial questions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k from time to time of filing the bills of entry leading to the processing activities and its culmination to the goods being re-exported. These documents also contained the details of the suppliers, number of pieces, heat number, test number, lot number, tallysheets, chartered engineers certificate etc. All in all, this was found to be a case of genuine export, without any semblance of evidence indicating otherwise than this. 13. Another ground which had weighed with CESTAT while so holding was that no opportunity was made available for the cross-examination in respect of some of the statements said to have been recorded by the authorities. On the strength of this entire material, it concluded that there was no justification in upholdin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
