9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 715X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant imported capital goods and filed three warehouse Bills of Entry No. 5906605 dt. 03.02.2012, 5906546 dt. 03.02.2012 and No. 6448863 dt. 03.04.2012 and bonded the goods. On expiry of warehousing period the customs authorities issued demand notices on 13.03.2013 in respect of two Bill of Entries and 20.05.2013 (3rd Bill of Entry), under Section 72(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spect of the said good. In respect of 1st and 2nd Bill of Entry the application seeking for extension of bond period was submitted after the issue of notices under Section 72(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. In respect of 3rd Bill of Entry, the application was submitted beyond the permissible period of 15 days after the expiry of the bonding period and also denied the appellant's request for wai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 (287) ELT 36 (Bom.). 4. The Ld. AR for the revenue reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority and particularly drew the attention of the Bench, para-15 of the Order, he submits that the appellant was duly given a personal hearing on 03.07.2013, before passing the impugned order and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. 5. At this juncture, the Ld. Advocate, submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, it appears that the impugned order has been passed by the adjudicating authority without giving any proper opportunity of hearing to explain their case in person. It is also seen that the appellant vide letter dated 27.03.2013, had submitted before the Commissioner that they have obtained necessary authorization (Zero Duty EPCG Licence). On perusal of the said authorization No. 223000215 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
