2016 (4) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ition of the Notification but Revenue had not accepted it as it was produced beyond three months of the clearance of the consignment - Held that:- findings of both the authorities are erroneous, as the said Notification No. 17/2001-Cus mandates production of end use certificate only for the reason and ascertainment that the imported consignment has been put to use for which it was imported. The sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3. On perusal of records, we find that this appeal is filed in the year 2004. Hence we take up the appeal for disposal even in the absence of any representation from the appellant. 4. Heard the Ld. departmental representative and perused the records. 5. The issue that falls for the consideration of the bench is regarding whether the benefit of Notification No. 17/2001-Cus can be extended f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hree months of the clearance of the consignment. In our considered view, findings of both the authorities are erroneous, as the said Notification No. 17/2001-Cus mandates production of end use certificate only for the reason and ascertainment that the imported consignment has been put to use for which it was imported. The said Notification also provides for extension of time for production of such .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X