9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hru Customs House, acknowledging relinquishment of title to the goods lying uncleared had been accepted, was directed to be withdrawn while dismissing their pleas for further relief. 2. According to the appellant, who had imported five containers of 'dicyandiamide' from M/s Shenyang Aimixin Chemicals Ltd, China, against bill of entry no. 3883010 dated 23rd June 2011, 57.18 MT out of total quantity of 100MT had been taken delivery of after assessment was duly completed and duty liability discharged. It is claimed that the consignment, upon being subject to testing and found to contain 'sodium chloride', was not in conformity with the sale contract and they had sought relinquishment under section 26A of Customs Act, 1962 which was allowed p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any proceedings initiated for disposal by the original authority and that re-visiting of the decision of the competent authority under section 26A of Customs Act, 1962 in favour of appellant was in excess of jurisdiction. 4. We have heard Learned Authorised Representative who submits that the first appellate authority had merely directed the drawal of samples and fresh decision on the claim for refund arising in consequence of relinquishment under section 26A of Customs Act, 1962 and for penal action arising from misdeclaration ascertained therefrom. 5. We find that the issue before the first appellate authority in the appeal of the importer was limited to the non-disposal of the claim of appellant, in relation to the goods already clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quires fulfilment of three conditions simultaneously along with one of the components of the fourth. The claim of the appellant is that the two containers cleared by them should also be entitled to benefit of refund of duty. However, there is no evidence on record to show that the goods that was taken into their possession was the same as that which was cleared. Further, these have neither been re-exported nor destroyed in compliance with section 26A of Customs Act, 1962. Relinquishment of title to the goods is not permissible to goods that have already been cleared. Consequently, the claim for refund of section 26A is limited only to such as those which were uncleared and acknowledged as relinquished. 7. Accordingly, we allow the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
