9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er number mentioned on the Bill of Lading was not tallying with the container number mentioned in the ARE-1 and the Seal No. given on mate receipt is different from the Seal No. given on the ARE-1 and the clarification submitted by the appellants that the discrepancies were typographical error was not accepted/approved by the Commissioner in pre-audit of the claim. 3. The appeal filed against the above order was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) observing as under :- On going through the documents, it is found that not only the container number and seal number but the quantity and weight appearing on the Bill of Lading is also not tallying with the quantity and weight given in ARE-1 No. 41, dated 14-1-05. The ARE-1 states the quant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not offer any findings on this ground and hence, it is presumed that, in the absence of any rebuttal thereto, he has accepted the contention of the applicants. (iv) That Commissioner (Appeals), however, upholds the order on brand new ground of discrepancy with regard to number of pellets, gross weight and net weight mentioned in ARE-1 and shipping bill. (v) That once both ARE-1 Nos. 41 and 42 are considered it is clear that Bill of Lading was prepared against two shipping bills. (vi) That once goods actually exported, minor discrepancies cannot be ground for rejection of rebate. (vii) That the applicants rely upon the following decisions in support of their contention that even if all the conditions of a noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 41 (1) bottle seal No. Misc. S-220507. Similarly Part-B of the ARE-1 bears customs endorsement that the consignment was shifted under S/B No. 3216216, dated 12-1-05. 6.3 Government further notes that the applicants have also produced a photocopy of certificate issued by IFB Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd. wherein it is inter alia, certified that the container No. wrongly mentioned in the B/L as FSC4231843-1 instead of correct container No. MISC. 231843 (1) and Seal No. 220507 instead of correct Seal No. S-220507, as certified by the Supdt. of Central Excise Range-04, Division Vasai, Commissionerate - Thane-II. 6.4 From the above facts it follows that the applicants have exported Central Excise duty paid goods out of India Government further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
