9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 631X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant. Shri M. Chandra Bose, Jt. Commissioner/AR for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per: Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar) 1. The issues involved for both the appeals pertaining to the same item of import, therefore they are taken up for common disposal. Both the appellants herein have imported an item declared as printer mechanism falling under the heading 8473.30 of Customs Tariff and claimed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estion is not a Populated Printed Circuit Board and that no evidence has been put forth in the orders of lower authorities to substantiate the stand of the department or otherwise. On the other hand, Ld. DR supports the impugned orders. 3. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts. 4. It is seen that the Notification No.17/2001-Cus reduces the basic custom duty rate of 5% for parts fallin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anism or assembly, which according to us, is not a relevant aspect for determining notification benefit. 4.3 No expert opinion has been obtained by the department at the stage of import or before issue of show cause notice to substantiate the allegations that imported item includes a Populated Printed Circuit Board. On the other hand, the opinion obtained and submitted by the importers from the E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the populated printed circuit board". 4.5 In the event, we find that the entire proceedings are bereft of application of mind. In our opinion, the denial by department of notification benefit involving a technical interpretation of the impugned item without any technical expert opinion, reeks of arbitrariness and is unjust and unfair. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed herein a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
