Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Customs, Noida Customs Commissionerate Versus M/s Prateek Traders

2017 (11) TMI 703 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Refund claim - Relinquishment of title of goods - prohibited goods - Held that: - as provided under Sub-section 2 of Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962, the law did not allow respondent to relinquish his title to said goods since the said goods were found to be mis-declared. Further, the goods brought into were prohibited, since they did not have environmental clearance for importation of the same and, therefore, the goods had violated the provisions of Section 11 of Customs Act, 1962 - In view .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.NOI/EXCUS/000/APP/285/2014-15 dated 23/12/2014 passed by Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, (Appeals), Meerut-II at Noida. The appeal is filed by Revenue. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent filed bill of Entry bearing No.6914966 dated 24.05.2012 for 204.030 MT of Heavy Melting Scrap (HMS) classifying the imported goods under Chapter Heading No.72044900. The duty was assessed at ₹ 8,55,923/- on 24.05.2012 and consignment was ordered for second check. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on 12.07.2012 for determining the nature and composition of the goods. The samples were sent to M/s Shri Ram Institute Industrial Research for testing. On the basis of composition, as per test certificate issued by M/s Shri ram Institute for Industrial Research, the percentage of Iron was found to be 6.26% only. Thus, the goods could not be categorized as per description mentioned in the B/E and were further classified as slag falling under Chapter 26 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Further, th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

requested for refund of duty already paid. They also expressed their inability for re-export of the goods which virtually had no commercial value. The respondent vide their letter dated 0808.2012 submitted that order was for import of 204.03MT of HMS, however, on examination only 4 MT of the goods were found as HMS and the balance quantity was found to be slag. They further stated that the goods were supplied at the rate of USD 455/MT CIF and the value of the goods as per invoice of overseas su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Bill of Entry dated 24.25.2012 under Section 111 (d) and 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and gave an option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 10,00,000/- for re-export of the imported slag. The confiscated goods were however, allowed for home consumption on payment of redemption fine provided approval of MOEF for import of slag was produced and in such a situation goods found as per examination report i.e. 199.790 MT of slag from the manufacture of Iron & Steel wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y of the option given by the adjudicating authority. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim. Being aggrieved with the above said Order-in-Original dated 14.08.2012 respondent preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dated 23.12.2014 observed that the claim of the appellant cannot be rejected treating it as premature simply of the ground that they did not exercise any of the option given by the Commissioner. Accordingly, Com .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fund claim of the party, in the instant case is subject to relinquishment of the title of imported goods. M/s Prateek Traders, Ghaziabad would be entitled to to refund of duty paid by them, if the same had been done by them as per relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. This point had however, not been discussed in the impugned Order-In-Appeal. Section 23 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962 dealing with the relinquishment of the imported goods provides as under:- "The owner of any imported g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me being in force. Thus, in terms of the above provision, the owner of imported goods may relinquish their title to the goods imported at any time before an order for clearance of goods for home consumption under Section 47 of the Act is made. It is further subject to conditions mentioned in proviso to this sub section. In the instant case, it appears that M/s Prateek Traders exercised the option to relinquish their title to the goods vide their letter dated 02.09.2012, i.e. well after the passi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version