9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 797X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions made by appellant 1, we find that the order has been passed without application of mind and needs to be sent back to the adjudicating authority for passing a speaking order taking into account all the submissions made. The appeals are allowed by way of remanding back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the course of argument. 4.2 In Para 4 the Principal Commissioner has recorded as follows :- "4. M/s. Marvel Silver has submitted defence reply dated 24-5-2021 and the same is extracted below for ease of reference, - "1. I, Nilesh P. Jain, Partner of M/s. Marvel Silver having office at above mentioned address (hereinafter referred as the Noticee for brevity) is in receipt of the Show Cause Notice dated 30-12-2020 issued by the Commissioner of Customs APSC, Mumbai with regard to the import of jewelry by M/s. Marvel Silver allegedly claiming exemption from Customs Duty under Sr. No. 966(1) of the Customs Notification 46/2011 as amended by Notification No. 96/2017. 2. In the subject show cause notice, the Noticee has been asked to show cause to the Commissioner of Customs (APSC), AWAS Corporate Point, Marol Naka, Mumbai 400059 as to why penalty should not be imposed upon them under the provisions of Section 112(a) or 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. xx xx xx" Further, in Paras 6 and 7 the Principal Commissioner has recorded as follows :- "6. Personal hearing in the matter was scheduled for 21-9-2021. The PH was held through video conference facility on CISCO Webex me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endix I. Thailand figures in Appendix I. It is disputed that impugned goods were imported from Thailand. The proviso in the Notification lays down that "importer proves to the satisfaction of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, that the goods in respect of which the benefit of this exemption is claimed are of the origin of the countries as mentioned in Appendix I, in accordance with provisions of the Customs Tariff Determination of Origin of Goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India Rules, 2009". In other words, the importer has to present a valid Country of Origin Certificate. The Customs Tariff Determination of Origin of Goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India Rules, 2009 (the said Rules) describe "Certificate of Origin" in rule 13 and the "Operational Certification Procedures are laid down in Annexure III of the said Rules. The Noticees have not disputed the requirement of a va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r claiming the benefits. The defence has not questioned the condition of submitting COC. It is trite that the claimant has to submit a valid COC i.e., one which duly covers the goods declared in the bill of entry. An invalid COC would fail to sustain the claim for exemption benefit. I find that the defence is completely silent on the charges of discrepancies in the description of goods declared in the relevant bill of entry vis-a-vis the COC submitted by the importer. In other words, the Noticee I has not disputed the factum of non-coverage of goods declared on specified B/Es in the COC presented by them. In fact, it is noted and recorded that the importer has not made any efforts in justifying the duty exemption benefit. In the given facts & circumstances, I find and hold that M/s. Marvel Silver failed to provide valid COCs for the goods imported under the specified bills of entry. As the importer failed to comply with the condition prescribed in Notification No. 46/2011-Customs, dated 1-6-2011, I hold that they were not entitled to the benefit of exemption from payment of duty in terms of the said notification. I note and record that M/s. Marvel Silver have not questioned or disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant 1 has filed a detailed reply which has not been recorded by the Principal Commissioner. The first two paras of the reply filed by appellant are reproduced below :- "1. We are in receipt of the Show Cause Notice dated 30-12-2020 issued to our importing Firm M/s. Marvel (hereinafter referred as the Noticee for brevity) with regard to the import of jewelry by M/s. Marvel Silver allegedly claiming undue exemption from Customs Duty under Sr. No. 966(1) of the Customs Notification No. 46/2011 as amended by Notification No. 96/2017. 2. In the subject Show Cause Notice, the Noticee has been asked to show cause to the Commissioner of Customs (APSC), AWAS Corporate Point, Marol Naka, Mumbai - 400059 as to why :- xx xx xx" 1. Paras 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 of the reply are also reproduced below :- "4.2 It is alleged that description of goods mentioned in the Bill of entry and the AIFTA certificate does not match fully, Certificate of Origin is the document certifying the origin of country where in the export goods are procured and manufactured originally and hence requirement of Country-of-Origin Certificate is mandatory for availing exemption from payment of duty. 4.3 It was f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
