Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 302 - AT - CustomsBenefit of N/N. 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002 - import of Marine Gas Oil - sub-sea equipment supply under NELP project - fuel used for running such vessels is exempt under S. No. 217 ibid - whether MGO is different from HSD (High Speed diesel oil) and is MGO exigible to benefit of N/N. 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002? - Held that: - The issue stands squarely covered by the judgments in the case of Transocean Discoverer 534 LLC Vs CCE [2015 (7) TMI 816 - CESTAT BANGALORE] where it was held that There was a specific query from the Custom House asking the Chemical Examiner to state specifically whether the product is MGO or not. Instead of specifically stating whether the product is MGO or not, the Chemical Examiner has chosen to show us that the product is LDO. In the absence of a specific report from the Chemical Examiner that the product is not MGO which was what required by the Custom House, it cannot be said that the Chemical Examiner’s report supports the case of the Custom House. There is no evidence to show that the product is not MGO. The Chemical Examiner’s report also as observed by us does not support the case of the appellant. At this juncture, the learned AR submitted that the appellants have not challenged the test report at all. In fact even though the tests were conducted much earlier the results of the samples were communicated to the appellants only in 2012, the learned counsel drew our attention to a letter written by the appellants to the Customs saying that the sample may be referred to CRCL for re-examination. Further no action was taken on this letter probably because by the time the letter was written a number of years have already passed. Since it is not the case of the Revenue that the product imported by the appellant does not fulfill the parameters for MGO as per the Indian Standards, we are not in a position to uphold the impugned order taking a stand that what is imported is LDO and not MGO and therefore the benefit of exemption is not available. Exemption available - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|