9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re drawn by the appellant themselves. We find that this approach is incorrect. The department should have got the goods tested in the first place before coming to a conclusion. They could have at least sent samples at least on the request of the appellant. Both having not been done, Revenue can not brush aside the report given by an expert committee simply for the reason that sample was not drawn and referred by the Department - Department has not adduced anything to counter the report of the Textiles Committee. Revenue has not proved that the sample sent to Textile Committee was not representative of the impugned goods. Moreover, the classification suggested by the Public Notice supports the appellants claim. Here too, Revenue did not prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt under protest after payment of the penalty and filed an appeal against the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs (Export) JNCH Nhava Sheva. On an appeal filed, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai - II, JNCH, Nhava Sheva passed the impugned order upholding the findings of Joint Commissioner. Hence, the appellant preferred this appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the commissioner did not through the merit of case and without considering and referring to the Public Notice No. 22/2012 Dated 06/07/2012, which was submitted by the Appellant in their favour in classifying the consignment under the Code 6206; commissioner ignored the report of the Textile Committee certifying the Code 6206 for the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S Mustafa Najibhai Trading Co relied upon by the department was related to import of goods and intention of the importer and hence, not relevant to the present case. Hence, the allegation of misdeclaration and imposition of penalty are not justified. He prays that the impugned goods be classified under 6206 and impugned order be set aside. 3. Learned Authorised Representative reiterates the findings of OIA. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. The major argument of the appellant is based on the certification given by Textile Committee and the clarification given vide Public Notice 22/2012 dated 06/07/2012 issued by New Delhi. On a perusal of Textile committee report dated 7th September 2012 have given the descrip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
