9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 999X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017, dated 28-6-2017 - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that the appellant had imported footwear and as per the relevant N/N. 1/2017, it was mandatory to mention the sale price of the footwear on the footwear itself for claiming the benefit of concessional rate of duty. The appellant also admits that they were aware of the fact that MRP had to be mentioned since in the past also they had imported a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and therefore, the impugned order needs no interference. The impugned order is upheld - Appeal dismissed. - MRS. R. BHAGYA DEVI, MEMBER (T) Shri Baby M.A., Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Dyamappa Airani, Jt. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant M/s. Global Trading Corporation filed a Bill of Entry No. 8832573, dated 13-11-2018. On examination by the Customs Officers, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the imported goods claims it to be only a venial violation which can be cured even after import before the goods are cleared. It is also submitted that in the past, the goods covered by the impugned orders were sold by the importer by charging IGST at the rate of 5%, therefore, there is no justification in confiscating the goods. 3. The Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o they had imported and cleared the goods and it is also admitted that the imported goods MRP/RSP was not mentioned on any of these products. The Commissioner appeals in the impugned order has rightly observed that As per Sl. No. 225 of Schedule 1 of Notification No. 1/2017 (Rate), dated 28-6-2017 this lower rate of 5% is applicable to footwear of Chapter 64 only if they have a retail sale price n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
