2005 (11) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. Heard both sides. The learned advocate for the appellant states that initially the impugned goods were imported under shipping bills dated March 4-3-1994, 4-8-1994 and 11-8-1994 and subsequently, since the goods were rejected by the foreign buyer, the same were imported on September, 20 and November, 28, 1994. He further states that subs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gned goods, the appellants case is covered by the provision of Clause (d) of the proviso to sub-section (l) of Section 20 of the Customs Act, 1962 under which no duty is required to be paid on re-importation of goods produced or manufactured in India. 2. It is the contention of the learned S.D.R. that Section 20 only grants exemption from basic customs duty and not from additional customs duty. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X