9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1072X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty – However appellant deserve reduction in fine and penalty – Decided partly allowed Assesse. - C/85111/2013-Mum - Final Order No. A/1499/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 24-11-2014 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (J) Shri J.C. Patel, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Senthil Nathan, Dy. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER [Order]. - The present appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 848/MCH/JC/ICD(M)/2012 dated 09-10-2012 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai Zone -I, wherein ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the impugned order and dismissed the appeal of the appellant. The fact of the case is that the appellant filed Bill of Entry No. 2904709, dated 07-03-2011 for the clearance of 24.110 M. Tones of old white and coloured, cut wiper industrial rags valued ₹ 14,52,787/- classified under CTH 63109010 as woolen rags. On examination, it was revealed that out of 480 bales, 180 bales are coloured and remaining 300 bales white. It was verified that the goods are not completely pre-mutilated and they are identical form and appear to be new. It was also reported that the goods are not of wool or hosiery but appeared to be of cott ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CTH 6309. Only garments which are totally unserviceable and beyond repair should be classified under CTH 6310. In this regard he submits that this condition is applicable only in case of garments whereas in the present case the goods are not garment but it is cut pieces of fabric so if the fabric is new and it is in mutilated form, it will be covered under 6309. He submits that even in the finding of adjudication authority so confirmed; it is accepted that woolen rags/synthetic rags/shoddy wool, the import of the same is permitted as per para 2.32.4 of Import policy read with para 5.3 of ITC(HS). The impugned goods of the appellant will be covered in such category for the reason that from the test report it is admitted that all majority of the fabric is that of polyester filament, polyester spun and cotton. It is his submission that from admitted fact, it is clear that out of 480 bales, 180 bales are coloured of two types and remaining 300 bales white. As per the test report only blue colour fabric is wholly composed of cotton yarn therefore majority of material is of polyester. It is his submission that in view of above fact the product is clearly covered under CTH 63109040 and no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required certificate from the Drugs Control Authorities, we are of the view that a lenient consideration is called for. Accordingly, we set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants and reduce the redemption fine to a token amount of ₹ 25,000.00 (Rupees Twenty-five thousand) subject to the condition that the appellants shall take release of the consignment and re-export the same immediately thereafter. The appeal is partly allowed. Successes Engineering v. CC, Kandla 6. We have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. The shipments were made on the basis of documents against payments. The explanation given by M/s. Success Engineering, Hong Kong that there was a downward revision of prices necessitating issue of another invoice is not acceptable for the simple reason that no reliable correspondence culminating in a downward revision has been produced. Even if there was downward revision, there was no need for issue of anti-dated invoices. But for the investigation commenced by the DRI, the consignments could have been cleared giving the invoice for US $ 550/MT. Having submitted the documents through the Bank for certain value, to supply invoice at a lower ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case considered by the High Court also may not have any bearing on the present case. In the case of M.V. Marketing Supplies (supra), this Bench was considering a case of wrong shipment of supplier, more or less similar to the instant case. In that case, however, the importer had not paid for the goods supplied by the foreign party and, therefore, it was held that title of the goods had not passed on to the importer. Nevertheless, the importer was allowed to re- export the goods on payment of redemption fine and penalty. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the Customs authorities received a letter from the supplier, which stated that the mistake of wrong shipment was on their part. Nowhere in the orders of the lower authorities is there any averment, observation or finding in the nature of discrediting the supplier s statement. It is also on record that, almost soon after examination of the consignments, the importer took up the matter with the supplier and also requested the department for permission to re-export the goods. In the circumstances, the request should have been favourably considered. This is not to say that there was no misdeclaration of goods by the impor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
