9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the same very day, as the duty was paid by them on 19-5-2012, has to be accepted. In terms of the said registration the appellant were required to transport the imported waste directly to the actual users from the port of import. Merely because there was delay in passing out of charge order or in clearance of the imported goods, the invoice raised by them on 19-5-2012 cannot be held to be an invoice in respect of the some other goods. The original adjudicating authority has examined the said invoice and found the goods mentioned therein are relatable to the imported goods. There is no evidence on record indicating that the goods sold by 19 May 2012 invoice was different then the goods imported or the imported goods have been sold by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been sold by the respondent on 19-5-2012 against Invoice No. 19, dated 19-5-2012 i.e. prior to the date of out of charge given by the Superintendent (Customs), ICD, Loni in case BE No. 6679459, dated 28-4-2012 which is 22-5-2012. As such the goods sold on Invoice No. 19, dated 19-5-2012 are not the same as imported by the respondent against the said BE. 3. The appellant submitted before Commissioner (Appeals) that the duty on goods against BE No. 6679459, dated 28-4-2012 was paid vide TR. 6 challan dated 19-5-2012 and presuming that the goods would get out of charge by 19-5-2012, the sale invoice was made in the name of buyer on 19-5-2012. The respondent further contended that the goods had to be transferred to the buyer directly from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... day, as the duty was paid by them on 19-5-2012, has to be accepted. In terms of the said registration the appellant were required to transport the imported waste directly to the actual users from the port of import. Merely because there was delay in passing out of charge order or in clearance of the imported goods, the invoice raised by them on 19-5-2012 cannot be held to be an invoice in respect of the some other goods. The original adjudicating authority has examined the said invoice and found the goods mentioned therein are relatable to the imported goods. There is no evidence on record indicating that the goods sold by 19 May 2012 invoice was different then the goods imported or the imported goods have been sold by the appellant to any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
