9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 756X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arance of 864 cartons and declared an assessable value of Rs. 7,34,337/-. The goods were examined under first check provision and representative samples were drawn as there was a complaint from M/s. Addison & Co. Ltd. and the said sample was sent for analysis to Deputy Chief Chemist. On receipt of the Deputy Chief Chemist s report, the said samples were also sent to IIT, Mumbai for evaluation as to whether the said drill bits were manufactured and conformed to specification of high speed steel (HSS) drill bits or otherwise. Show cause notice dated 5.7.2005 was issued for confiscation of the seized goods and also for the demand of duty as also for imposition of penalties. Appellant contested the entire case on merits. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as upheld by the apex court as reported at 2015 (319) ELT 616 (SC). It is his submission that enhancement of value is also incorrect. Further he would submit that the confiscation ordered under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 is also incorrect as the said goods were confiscated on the ground that they were violative of Notification 1/64-Cus. dated 18.1.1964, as the goods bore false trade mark as per Section 28 read with Section 102 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, registered for trade mark belonging to another entity. It is his submission that the above said notification prohibits import of goods which bear a false trade mark in contravention of the provisions of the Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958, which has been rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ru Custom House, after testing the said drill bits, in the report dated 4.3.2005 and 8.4.2005, informed that the drill bits are composed of alloy of iron, chromium, molybdenum etc. and may be considered as high speed steel. Since the said report was inconclusive, the Customs authorities sent the samples to IIT, Mumbai for its evaluation. It would be in the fitness of the case that the said report of the IIT, Mumbai, is reproduced in its entirety, - Professor B.T. Rao MET:1:6:2004 March 29, 2005 Mr. B.K. Dixit Appraising Officer (CIU/JNCH) Central Intelligence Unit Office of the Chief Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai-II Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House Nhava Sheva, Dist. Raigad Maharashtra 400 707. Dear Sir, Job No. DRD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arty as test certificate from I.I.T. Bombay. Yours faithfully, (Prof. B.T. Rao) Professor Deptt. of Metallurgical Engg. & Mat.Sciences Indian Institute of Technology Powai, Bombay 400 076." 5.1 It can be seen from the above reproduced report of IIT, Mumbai, that it is categorically stated that the drill bits which are analyzed do not conform to any specification of high speed steel and do not have the strength and hardness of high speed steel and the drill bits are of mild nature and made of alloy steel. Despite such a clear test report of the IIT, the adjudicating authority has held that the goods are liable for confiscation as they are of high speed steel. In our view, the adjudicating authority being not an expert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
