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 1586 - CESTAT MUMBAIMis-declaration of imported goods - goods declared as ‘polyester texturised fabric’ which, upon detailed examination, was found to be incompatible with the description in the heading no. 5407 6190 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - scope of N/N. 36/2003-Cus dated 1st March 2003 - HELD THAT:- The SCN although dated 12th August 2003, is based upon a test report that, admittedly, pertains to 2004-05, which is inconceivable. Learned Authorised Representative submits that the date in the show cause notice appears to be erroneous and such discrepancy does not make any difference to the proceedings. We do find some merit in the submission as it would have been impossible to issue a show cause notice just a day after the bill of entry was filed; it would appear that the show cause notice was authored on some other date. Appellant had claimed classification as fabric containing 85% or more by weight of textured polyester filaments. It is seen that the Textile Committee did not find any contrary reason to suggest discrediting this contention. The customs authorities chose to revise the classification based on a test report generated through the Deputy Chief Chemist after testing of the remnant samples. We do not find any evidence of that test report in the records. The reliance placed on the results of testing by Deputy Chief Chemist is not acceptable. If at all, the proper procedure would have been for the remnant samples, after due notice to the importer, to be subject to re-test by the Textile Committee. Thus, report of the Deputy Chief Chemist cannot overrule the earlier test results - the re-classification, with consequent disallowance of the benefit of notification, is not proper in law. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|