Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 485 - CESTAT MUMBAIExtended period of limitation - import of goods - SCN for demand of duty in respect of imports made vide bill of entries filed during the period 15.03.2000 to 18.10.2001 was issued on 11.03.2005 - HELD THAT:- The appellants have made the declaration on the Bill of Entries as per the description given in the invoices of the foreign supplier. Since the description as has been given by the foreign supplier declare on the Bill of Entries, the appellants cannot be held guilty for mis declaring the same. The classification declared by the appellants on the Bill Of Entry is as per their understanding and assessment, it is for the assessing officer to determine the correct classification and duty payable. It is not the case of the department that appellants have made any declaration which was contrary to the documents available with the importer at the time of filing of Bill of Entry. No evidence has been produced by the department to the effect that catalogue of the “DANLOAD 6000” was called for by the assessing officer and not produced by the appellants. The entire case of the revenue is based on the few statements recorded by the Custom officers. The statement of Mr Shrish were recorded on 20.02.2002, 11.06.2002, 25.08.2004 and 03.02.2005, Shri Fifadra on 03.04.2002 and of Shri Atul on 19.11.2003. Since all the facts including the catalogues relied upon in show cause notice were made available to revenue as early as in 2002, the delay in issuance of show cause notice could not be justified. Correction of clerical errors, etc. - Section 154 of Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- From plain reading of the Section it is evident that the Section is available for correction of arithmetical mistakes or clerical errors in the “decisions or orders” and not the Show Cause Notice. By applying the said Section for correction of the error in the Show Cause Notice, has gone beyond the scope of section. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|