2006 (12) TMI 66

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ification No. 16/2000-Cus. was denied to the quantity of 18.370 MT of crude palm oil on the ground that it was not used for the manufacture of vanaspati. 2. The contention of the appellant is that the palm oil in question was lost in an accident during transit from port of importation to this factory and this fact was not denied by the Revenue. The appellant relied upon the decision of the Suprem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of the tanker when the palm oil was transported from port of importation to factory. This fact was not disputed by the Revenue. There is no allegation that the imported goods are diverted by the appellants for other purpose than mentioned in the notification. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of BPL (supra) allowed the benefit of Notification which provides certain benefits to specified item .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X