9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the prescribed shelf-life at the time of import. There is no evidence on record to sustain the contention that the appellant had imported the goods even though aware that it was contrary to Foreign Trade Policy. Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - APPEAL NO: C/88082/2017 - A/86177/2018 - Dated:- 12-4-2018 - Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Rohan Balani with Shri Anil Balani, Advocates for appellant Shri Manoj Kumar, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for respondent ORDER M/s Olive Tree Trading Pvt Ltd, who had imported consignments of coconut milk and almond milk vide bill of entry no. 4360865 dated 24 th February 2016, requested their supplier to take back the goods for b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant they had on their own communicated the probable non-compliance with the FSSAI norms and that the exporter was not willing to take back the goods which remained under the control of customs authorities. The goods were destroyed as ordered by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. It is also contended that the goods having been destroyed while in custody of the custodian, the duty should have been remitted under section 23 of Customs Act, 1962. It is further contended the goods were not cleared for home consumption on which alone the discharge of duty liability is predicated. Reliance was placed on the decision of Tribunal in Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad v. ACX International [2012 (286) ELT 602 (Tri.Ahmd)] 7. The Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel clearly indicates that the appellant was consistently following-up with the revenue authorities for destruction of said goods. Despite of such efforts, there was no answer or any communication from the revenue and the appellants were slapped with the show cause notice on 17-3-2005 for destruction of such goods. We are of the considered opinion, that in this case, there is no error or fault of the appellant in destroying the goods even before the jurisdictional authorities came and verified the extent of damage of the said goods, as the fungus which had developed on the imported goods could have spread in their factory, which is manufacturing instant coffee. Another way of approaching this issue is, that, the imported goods were lyi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
