9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants made import of Kraft Cheddar Cheese and filed a Bill of Entry dated 25-3-2000. The goods were released on provisional basis to the appellants. The Cheese was directly imported from M/s. Craft Wood Ltd., Australia. 3. Sample taken by the Revenue sent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants filed an appeal and Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dismissed the appeal. 4. The contention of the appellant is that they imported the cheese from the manufacturer through trader to Singapore. The goods in question were consumable and goods were provisionally released to the appellant which was sold in the market. The contention of the appellant is also that they procu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... am Institute for Industrial Research and both the test reports shows that the samples confirms to the standard of processed cheese. The contention of the appellant is that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order relied upon the Public Notice dated 1-11-2001 wherein the present import was made in the year March, 2000, therefore, the Board's circular is not applicable to the present import. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oms authority which was subsequently sold in the market. The contention of Revenue is that the cheese imported by the appellant is not as per the parameters laid down under the Prevention of Food Adulteration, therefore, it is not liable for clearance as per Board's circular dated 25-10-2001. 8. I find that Board's circular was issued on 25-10-2001 whereas the goods were provisionally releas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
