2018 (3) TMI 873

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ), for Appellant Mr. J.S. Sanghvi, Consultant, for Respondent Per: Ramesh Nair The respondent has imported three consignments of Rayon Yarn which was entitled to effective rate of duty as mentioned under Notification No. 69/2011-Cus dated 29.7.2011 (Sr. No. 370). While finalizing the assessment, the assessing officer has not granted the benefit of Notification No. 69/11-Cus thereby resulted in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of notification squarely rest on the assessee. Since the notification is based on import from a particular country, once the importer fails to claim the notification, the department is also protected from verifying the veracity of the claim during imports based on the goods itself. 3. Ms. Trupti D. Chavan, learned Asstt. Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the grounds .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n even if at the time of clearance of goods is not claimed, the same can be claimed at a later stage. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, which is only directed the assessing authority to reconsider the Bills of Entry in the light of Notification No. 69/2011-Cus. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the Revenue's appeals. (Pronounced in Court on 31.01.2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X