9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es not satisfy' the norms and conditions laid down for the type of finished leather as declared for the reason viz. absence of dyeing imparting medium/dark shade. After issuing the show cause notice and according to personal hearing, the case was adjudicated on the strength of CLRI certificate to the effect that the goods do not confirm to the specifications under ETL PN 3/92-97 and hence it forms a semi-finished leather and not finished leather as declared. The exporter was allowed to take back the goods to town on payment of redemption fine and personal penalty. Aggrieved with this order, the importer filed an appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal stating that CLRI was not correct in saying the goods as semi-finished le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er as per the ETC PN 3/92-97 issued by the Ministry of Commerce is not proper in law and hence lacks maintainability." 2.Heard learned DR, who has reiterated the grounds of appeal and the order of the Additional Commissioner which was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3.Learned Additional Commissioner has, after a detailed discussion, held that burnished leather unless satisfies the norms and conditions, it cannot be deemed to be a finished leather and found that burnished leather to be drum dyed and on rubbing should show a distinct glass with a darkening of the shade giving rise to a burnishing effect. He further held that as per norms leather should be dyed, should be treated with synthetic dye imparting medium dark shade and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n. He pointed to paras 4 5 of the order of the Additional Commissioner to submit that the cross-examination of CLRI authorities was sought, which was not granted. 6.We have considered these submissions and find that the Additional Commissioner did not examine the CLRI authorities and therefore, the test report of CLRI and relied on by him cannot be admitted as an evidence. The cross-examination of technical expert, who has tested and certified a particular export item to be finished or semi-finished is absolutely necessary to arrive at a conclusion whether the exports are permissible or not of the item under question. Any method or argument adopted to deny this right of cross-examination of the technical expert would render such technic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
