9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 870X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... release of goods i.e., L-ASCORBATE 2-PHOSPATE - 35 PCT, 50% of the Anti Dumping Duty as determined shall be paid by the petitioner and for the balance amount, a bond as directed by the authority concerned is directed to be executed by the petitioner. On such compliance, the goods shall be released forthwith. As far as the other item viz., MONO POTASSIUM PHOSPATE, it is mutually agreed by both the counsel on record that there is no dispute. Hence, the respondents are directed to release the said goods forthwith. - Decided in favour of assessee. - W. P. No. 15472 of 2015, M. P. No. 1 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 18-8-2015 - R. Mahadevan, J. For the Appellant : Mr. B. Sathish Sundar For the Respondent : Mr. K. Mohanamurali, Sr. Panel C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first week of November 2014 and the petitioner filed Bill of Entry No.7349429 dated 12.11.2014 with the office of the respondent for clearance of the same. According to the petitioner, the goods under import were to be used as raw material for manufacture of animal feeds supplement and not for pharmaceutical use. He would further submit that the petitioner classified the first lot of goods viz., L-ASCORBATE 2-PHOSPATE - 35 PCT under Customs Tariff Heading 29362700 and the 2nd lot of goods MONO POTASSIUM PHOSPATE under Customs Tariff Heading 2835 2400. However, the respondents raising certain objections as to the leviability of the 1st lot of goods to Anti Dumping Duty, have refused to release the entire consignment. Therefore, the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t covered under the relevant Notification governing levy of Anti Dumping Duty. Further, according to the learned counsel, earlier, the petitioner has sought for reclassification of the goods under HSN Chapter 2309 and not under HSN Chapter 2936, some of which covered under the said heading attracts Anti Dumping Duty, however, the 3rd respondent has not acceded to the request of the petitioner for reclassification. That apart, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents have not chosen to allow bonding of the goods nor they have released the second lot of goods MONO POTASSIUM PHOSPATE, which has been correctly classified and found to be in order. 5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods, the petitioner came up with an alternate classification for the goods with an intention to avoid payment of ADD. The item under import is a separately chemically defined organic compound and the classification claimed by the petitioner is under Vitamin C and its derivatives is proper and correct. In terms of Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, a speaking order is required to be issued when re-assessment is contrary to self assessment done by the importer. It is his contention that the department has accepted the classification claimed by the importer under self assessment and ADD was charged on the goods. The said decision was also communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 25.03.2015 and hence the contention of the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
