9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rated second grade quality. This report had been placed on record. The CEGAT accepted the fact that the goods forming part of the Delhi consignment were identical to the goods in question that is goods of the Ludhiana consignment. This IIT report left no scope to sustain the stand of the department. In our view the report obtained at the instance of the department itself had great force and it should not have been ignored. It is important to note that the report of the CRCL, New Delhi relied upon by the department does not unequivocally state that the goods were not regenerated second grade MMM. The report is carefully worded and gives an impression that something is sought to be concealed rather than truth being revealed. The onus is on the department to establish that it is a case of mis-declaration of goods. The department has miserably failed to discharge that onus in the present case. Therefore, we are unable to sustain the stand of the department. The impugned judgment of the CEGAT cannot be upheld. The same is set aside. The appeal is allowed. The order of the Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar, is restored. - 1648 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 31-3-2003 - M.B. Shah and Arun Ku ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of a test report dated 22-7-1996 said to have been obtained from the CRCL, New Delhi which reads as under : "The sample is in the form of colourless liquid and has the characteristics of methyl methacrylate monomer. The physico chemical properties of the same in respect of boiling point, refractive index, specific gravity and purity are in agreement with that of chemically pure methyl methacrylate monomer in the literature." 3.This report does not indicate whether the goods could be said to be regenerated second grade MMM. Since the report was not very clear, the CRCL was requested by the department vide letter dated 17-5-1997 to specify "whether the material can be described as Methyl Methacrylate Monomer regenerated second grade or virgin grade". The CRCL responded to the above vide its letter dated 23-5-1997 as under : "Keeping in view of physico chemical properties, the samples under reference do not have any basis to be considered as 'methyl methacrylate monomer regenerated second grade'." 4.In its reply to the show cause notice the appellant refuted the stand of the department. It was said in the reply that the appellant's similar consignment was held up at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal did not appreciate the test reports in favour of the appellant which included reports from the IIT, New Delhi, the Punjab Test House, Department of Industries, State of Punjab and the Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. Ltd. On the other hand, according to the learned counsel for the appellant the Tribunal had relied on a report of the CRCL which was not clear and which did not in unequivocal term support the stand of the Department. The CRCL report had to be read in the light of an earlier report of the CRCL with regard to sample of identical goods cleared at the ICD, Delhi in which the CRCL has stated that it did not have the facilities to conduct a test so as to find out whether the goods were regenerated second grade or not. This stand of the CRCL completely diluted its subsequent report with respect to the consignment in question and, therefore, the same could not have been relied upon. The said report is the only basis for the department to take a stand that the goods were of prime grade and not regenerated second grade. Therefore, it was contended that the impugned order of the Tribunal proceeded on a totally wrong basis and was, therefore, liable to be set aside. 8.Relying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was also obtained at the instance of the department. The reports in favour of the appellant by Government departments have been rejected on superfluous grounds. The reports produced by the appellant which it had obtained from official source clearly establish that there is no mis-declaration of goods and the imported goods are regenerated second grade MMM. 10.The Commissioner of Customs had given due weightage to the experiment conducted in his presence by the IIT Professor produced before him alongwith laboratory equipment by the appellant. This was however rejected by the Tribunal stating "how Commissioner ventured into such an exercise, there is nothing on record to show that he is a scientist competent to take any analysis". One need not be a scientist to appreciate a test report based on a test conducted in his presence by an expert from a prestigious institution like the IIT, New Delhi. The test was conducted in the presence of the departmental representatives and the Commissioner of Customs during the course of hearing. From the said test it has been opined that the goods in question were regenerated second grade MMM. The department neither objected to the test nor point ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
