9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 714X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tractor Parts OCKSHAFT Assembly MC 750 CC SI + REMOTE /Re-Export against BOE No.7683830 dt.22/12/2014. Thus, the appellant has disclosed in the shipping bill that they have re-exported the goods, and all the information was on the record of the Customs Department, as is evident from the facts on record. Further, at the relevant time, the bond had not been cancelled by the Department. The fact of re-export under bond is established. The rejection of the request for conversion is not tenable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Customs Appeal No.52524/2018-CU(SM) - Final Order No.50355/2019 - Dated:- 8-3-2019 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Appellant: Shri B.L. Garg, Advocate Respondent: Shri P. J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bill no.7255722 dated 25.04.2016 through ICD Tughlakabad (Export), New Delhi i.e. after about nearly sixteen months from the date of clearance of goods on importation (12.12.2014). The goods were still under Bond. 4. As subsequent to the re-export made in April, 2016, the appellant was entitled to get released the bond and bank guarantee, which was submitted by the appellant to the Customs in terms of notification no.158/95-Cus.They approached the Customs Authorities by their letter dated 9.8.2016 claiming for releasing the bond and bank guarantee for ₹ 13,24,903/-. In response thereto, the Asstt. Commissioner of Customs by letter dated 28.09.2016 pointed out that the appellant has not submitted (i) copies of AR-4s in respect of su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ping bill and it does not declare that exporter would be claiming the drawback under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962. Further observing that apart from these two conditions, the conditions with reference to production of import documents, etc. have been substantially complied with, as is evident. 7. Ld. Counsel assailing the reasons for refusal states that the appellant has made all other declarations indicating re-export of the goods on the shipping bill itself as also observed by the ld. Commissioner, and such compliance coupled with the exemption/waiver and the documentary evidence were very much in existence at the time of export, as required under proviso to Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 and accordingly, prays for ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
