9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The brief facts of the case are that the appellant engaged in the manufacture of forgings and forges articles of steel falling under Chapter Sub heading 7326.90, 8708.00 etc of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have imported the goods namely, Alloy Steel Forging Outlet (LH) and Alloy Steel Forging Flange Outlet (RH) under Notification No.32/97-Cus Dtd.1.4.1997 for the purpose of Job Work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot has Vide order Dated 13.01.2004, remitted the Central Excise duty upon the goods destroyed but the Customs duty demand raised in the Show cause notice was confirmed along with interest. Being aggrieved by order in original, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which came to be rejected. Hence, the present appeal. 2. Shri. R. Subrama ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as payment realized on account of exports under the various export promotion schemes". 3. Therefore, the goods cleared for export and even though the same could be physically supplied to foreign party but insurance claim was received, hence the entire exercise will amount to export of goods, therefore, the compliance of condition of Notification No.32/97-Cus stood made, therefore, the demand of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceeded to confirm the demand and upholding the same. 6. In our considered view, once the appellant have written letter for loss of their goods and remission of duty, without any decision on their request by the Commissioner of Customs JNPT, both the lower authorities should not have proceeded with deciding a Show cause notice and subsequently the appeal, therefore, in our view confirmation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
