TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 1096X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A/2224-2225/2015-WZB/SMB - Dated:- 18-8-2014 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (J) Shri T. Vishwanathan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri J.R. Sharma, Supdt. (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Appeal No. C/250/2012 is filed by the appellant against (Order-in-Appeal No. 01(CFS Navkar)/2012(JNCH)/EXP-01, dated 12-1-2012 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-II which was against a letter No. S/Gen-39/11-Ashte (X), dated 24-2-2011 of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Exports), communicating the order passed by Commissioner of Customs (X), JNCH, without enclosing the order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant, M/s. Suminter India Organics Pvt. Ltd., exported raw cotton from the Nhava Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the inputs imported should be used in the final product being exported. The only criteria to be satisfied, to be eligible for the benefit under the VKGUY scheme is that, the product exported has been notified under the Appendix 37A of the HBP V.1. This has been satisfied by the appellant. As per the Shipping Bill Regulations, 1993, there are no specific types of shipping bill for export of goods covered by the VKGUY scheme. Hence, the appellant could use only shipping bill for duty free goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) after hearing the appellant, observed that the order of rejection has been passed by Commissioner and the appeal against the order of the Commissioner does not lie before Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, he rejected the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heme, were filed by the appellants at the time of exporting raw cotton. He relies on the Tribunal s decision in the case of Areva T D India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai - 2009 (242) E.L.T. 442 (Tri.-Chennai), wherein it was held that the fact that examination norms applicable to DEEC shipping bills is not followed is not a sufficient enough reason for rejection of conversion of shipping bill. Accordingly prays for allowing the appeal. 4. The learned AR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings in impugned order. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the benefit of incentive on export of agricultural produce was extended vide Notification dated 17-2-2009, w.e.f. 1-4-2008. The shipments were made d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
