9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 708X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed classification under sub-heading No. 7404 0022 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Import of subject goods are regulated by the EXIM Policy, providing for certain conditions to be fulfilled by the importer. On arrival of the imported goods at the port of import, the same were examined by the Department and reported that the imported scrap is not covered under the definition of 'Brass Honey Scrap' and thus, the same can be considered as 'Mixed Scrap'. Since there was mis-match of the description of imported goods in the Bill of Entry vis-a-vis the report furnished by the Department, the goods were examined through a Chartered Engineer, Shri Ramesh Chandra Agrawal, who vide his report dated 09.09.2010 had confirmed that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I vide the impugned order dated 31.08.2012 has confirmed the adjudication order. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, both these appeals are filed by the appellants. 2. Shri Jatin Mahajan, the Id. Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that all the documents required for assessment were submitted by the appellant before the assessing authority; that the Department had obtained three reports, till it got the favorable one and that no explanation were furnished as to why the other two reports should not be considered for assessment; that Shri M.N. Mathur, whose report had been relied on by Department for enhancing the assessable value is a Civil Engineer, who is not competent to issue the reports concerning the field of Metals; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rap'. Ignoring both the above reports, the Department engaged the third Chartered Engineer, Shri M.N. Mathur and based on his report, the assessment was done classifying the imported goods as 'Mix Scrap of Brass and Copper'. It is an admitted fact on record that both the authorities below have not recorded any findings as to why the earlier reports furnished by the experts should not be considered for classification of goods. Further, the submissions of the appellant recorded in the impugned order at paragraph 7.3 (page 6) that Shri M.N. Mathur being a Civil Engineer, is not competent to furnish the report in the field of Metal and that the Department has influenced him for issuing the report, has not been addressed by the Id. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cross examination cannot be claimed as a matter of right under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since, the appellant has been denied with its rights to cross-examine the expert, his report cannot be relied on for assessment of the Bill of Entry, which is contrary to the claim of the appellant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries (supra) have held that if cross-examination of witness is denied, the same amounts to violation of natural justice and the order passed against the assessee cannot be sustained. The relevant paragraphs in the said judgment are extracted herein below:- "6. According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
