9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibility of the impugned goods for concessional rate under N/N. 46/2011-Cus dated 1st June 2011 is not in dispute. The specific entry within the said notification appears to have been erroneously claimed and, upon it being pointed out, the importer accepted the error in the bill of entry. That this error is, as claimed by the appellant, inadvertent would appear to be tenable as the possibility of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER PER: C J MATHEW This appeal challenges order-in-appeal no. 97(Gr.IIA)/2013 JNCH/IMP-90 dated 8th February 2013 of Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, Nhava Sheva in which order of the original authority for recovery of ₹ 99,958, as differential duty on import of myristic acid in three bills of entry, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or assessment that 6%, instead of 5%, in accordance with serial no. 299(i) of the very same notification. It was also ascertained that two bills of entry no. 5026946/27.10.2010 and no. 5329945/29.11.2011, assessed and cleared earlier, were also similarly eligible only under the alternative entry in the notification. 3. The importer accepted the error in having sought availment of the wrong entr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount involved in the imports is not of such significance as to warrant even suspicion of recourse to misdeclaration on their part. It was also submitted that the patent ineligibility of the goods under the declared classification for claim of that particular entry in the exemption notification would make it apparent that it was inadvertent and that there was no misrepresentation of any kind. Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declaration of tariff item, as well as description of the goods, would also make it apparent that there has been no misdeclaration within the meaning of section 111 of Customs Act, 1962 and that such a patent error cannot be seen as an attempt at misleading the system. The appellant seeks the setting aside of the confiscation and penalty ordered by the original authority and upheld in the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
