9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of facts to invoke the extended period of limitation. Thus, the demand made against the goods imported against Bill of Entry No. 712110 dated 29.03.2008 by issuing a Show Cause Notice after 3(three) years and 9(nine) months and for the goods imported under the Bill of Entry No. 325535 dated 01.02.2010 by issuing SCN after 1(one) year and 10(ten) months is barred by limitation and impugned orders are unsustainable. Classification - HELD THAT:- The issue of classification of the impugned imported goods is not decided as the issue is considered on limitation, and it is found that the impugned order is unsustainable on limitation. Appeal allowed. - Hon'ble Mr. P. A. Augustian , Member ( Judicial ) And Hon'ble Mr. Pullela Nageswara Ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re allowed to be cleared as per the declaration made by Appellant. The Appellant further submits that the issue of demanding duty at the belated stage is barred by limitation, since there is no evidence regarding suppression of facts at the time of import. The matter was adjudicated and as per the impugned order, the Adjudication Authority confirmed the demand of duty and also imposed equal amount of penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by the order, an appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the Order-in-Original issued by the Adjudicating Authority. Aggrieved by said order, present appeal is filed. 3. When the appeal came up for hearing, Learned Counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the department, the respondent could not have been said to have either mis-declared or suppressed facts in classifying its goods at the time of its import under CTH 1702. 4. Learned Counsel further submits that; at the time of import, they have produced the invoice and product catalogue and based on the same, declaration was made, moreover, at the time of assessment proper officer accepted the same after considering the issues in detail; there was no investigation conducted, no statement recorded from the Appellant, though it is alleged that there is suppression of facts at the time of import; thus the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in such cases. 5. Regarding the issue on merit, Learned Counsel also drew our attention to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the demand made against the goods imported against Bill of Entry No. 712110 dated 29.03.2008 by issuing a Show Cause Notice after 3(three) years and 9(nine) months and for the goods imported under the Bill of Entry No. 325535 dated 01.02.2010 by issuing SCN after 1(one) year and 10(ten) months is barred by limitation and impugned orders are unsustainable. Further, the issue of classification of the impugned imported goods is not decided as we have considered the issue of limitation, and it is found that the impugned order is unsustainable on limitation. 8. In view of the above discussion and the decisions cited by the appellants the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any in accordance with law. ( Order pronounced in open ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
