TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tands established. Consequently, the order of confiscation of the impugned goods with the imposition of redemption fine and penalty also merits no interference - since the appellant will not be entitled to concessional duty, the demand for differential duty is to upheld along with payment of interest - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - C/51386/2014(DB) - C/A/55839/2017-CU[DB] - Date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03.2002 (Sr.No.477) respectively. 2. The assessment was finalized and goods were allowed to be cleared at concessional rate of duty. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, examined the imported consignments, drew the samples and sent the same to CRCL Baroda, who, in their test reports, confirmed that the samples pertaining to the Bill of Entry were Crosslinkable Polyethylene and other than L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... custom authorities for retesting of the samples from CRCL New Delhi. Accordingly, she prayed that the impugned order may be set-aside. 4. The ld. DR justified the impugned order on the basis of the chemical test report from the Central Revenue Laboratory, Baroda. 5. We have heard both sides and perused the record. For the imported goods, the appellant claimed the benefit of concessional rate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ower authorities that the appellant will not be entitled to the benefit of notification requires no interference. 7. The appellant has submitted that the department did not allow re-testing of the samples as requested by them. The lower authorities have not accepted such request made by the appellant for the reason that no specific reason has been cited by the appellant in asking for the retest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
