9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the demand of duty and penalty were set aside. 2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s.Kirpal Exports, the respondents are engaged in the manufacture and export of woollen garments and obtained advance licence from DGFT under DEEC scheme (quantity based) and made import of duty free mohair tops under Notification No.43/2002 dt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posited the customs duty on the imported goods amounting to Rs.14,70,186/-. The contention of the Revenue that the statement of the partner of the respondent firm as well as the statement of the job workers clearly show that the imported goods were diverted and are not used for specified purpose. The revenue also submitted that a letter purported to have been issued to the officer of DGFT bearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that no raw material was received from the respondents for job work. This statement was disbelieved on the ground that an opportunity of cross examination has not been granted. We find that there are other statements including that of the partner of respondent firm which show that the imported goods were diverted into DTA market and the respondents were deposited the amount of Rs.14,70,186/-. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
