TMI Blog1997 (3) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts. Shri S.N. Ojha, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 15-1-1991 of Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi. 2. The appellants imported a consignment of Spare parts for Tape Deck Mechanism and claimed concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 188/87. Subsequently, however after the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... larification from the Department of Electronics certifying that these goods conform to description given in the Notification and are eligible to concessional rate of duty. The goods were assessed by the Customs Authorities and no reasons whatever have been given for denying them the concession. In fact, the Collector (Appeals) committed an error apparent on the face of the record in recording that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to put a person on notice to enable him to defend himself against charges raised against him. A person obviously would be in no position to put in his defence unless he is put on notice in regard to precise actions of omissions and commissions alleged to be committed by him. In the absence of this, a notice is not a notice but would partake the character of a command, something abhorrent to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es are having current rating less than 5 AMP/30 VDC. This clarification was given with reference to demand notice in respect of Bill of Entry No. 35238, dated 27th June, 1987 under which the goods were imported. In view of this, we fail to understand how this clarification is not relatable to the impugned goods as held by the Collector. The Collector (Appeals) has duly recorded clarification given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
