9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into contract No. 102 dated 26.06.2009 with M/s. Crown Industries, Bahrain for purchase of 300 MT of Stainless Steel Melting Scrap, grade 304, coils sheets, tapes mix and for that purpose, had opened an irrevocable letter of credit. The appellant had filed the bill of entry dated 29.08.2009, declaring the imported goods as per the description provided in the sales contract and the invoices. The imported consignment was examined on first check basis in the presence of CIU Officers and it was found to contain 117.57 MT of cold rolled stainless steel, coils/sheets grade 304 (secondary goods), 56.580 MT of hot rolled stainless steel coils grade 304 (secondary goods) and 126.90 MT of stainless steel scrap, grade 304. Based on investigation, depa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nduction furnace for melting and manufacturing stainless steel billets. In this context, he has also placed reliance on the End-use certificate dated 15.01.2010 issued by the Jurisdictional Range Superintendent of Central Excise. He further submitted that since the appellant had imported the goods for the purpose of melting and for further use in the manufacture of the final product and for that purpose, had maintained statutory records, it cannot be said that there was misdeclaration of goods. The learned Advocate further submitted that the department had not conducted any enquiry or obtained any opinion from the expert in the field to ascertain the nature of goods imported by the appellant. In this context, the Learned Advocate has relied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04.2018, in the case of the appellant has set aside the demand and allowed the appeal in respect of imports made vide bill of entry dated 05.03.2010, holding that decision with regard to nature of the goods cannot be ascertained by eye estimate and an expert opinion is required for ascertaining such facts. Thus we are of the view that customs examination report, without obtaining the expert opinion, cannot be the reason to determine the nature of goods and that mere agreement by the appellant or his employee with the contents of such examination report cannot be considered as conclusive proof in support of claim of revenue regarding confiscation of goods, payment of fine and penalty. 8. Therefore, we do not find any merits in the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
