9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 dated 28.08.2007 and claimed the benefit of exemption notification No. 84/97-CUS dated 11.11.1997. On scrutiny of the records it was found that there was a mis-declaration of the value. 3. A Show Cause Notice dated 10.02.2009 was issued proposing confiscation of the goods and demand of duty along with interest and to impose penalty. 4. By the impugned Order, the Learned Commissioner of Customs (Port) held that two nos. of Flash Butt Welding Machines, complete with accessories, imported under Bills of Entry dated 14.08.2007 and 28.08.2007 are liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and the goods in respect of Bill of Entry dated 14.08.2007 had been released and no redemption fine in lieu of confiscation was i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicating authority allowed the amendment of the Bill of Entry dated 14.08.2007. He has also dropped the demand of duty. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the case the relevant portion of the Adjudication Order is reproduced below : "15. So far as the demand of duty is concerned, I agree with the written submissions of the notice that the demand under Section 28 is not legally sustainable. I find that the demand of duty of Rs. 10,14,542.57 against Bill of Entry No.358899 dated 14.08.07 is based on a hypothetical situation i.e. charging of duty in the event of the importers being not in possession of duty exemption certificate. The fact of the matter is that the importersclaimed duty exemption under exemption Notification No.84/97- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... comes into play in cases where any duty has not been levied or has been short-levied or erroneously refunded, or when any interest payable has not been paid, part paid or erroneously refunded, whereas in the case of Bill of Entry No.358899 dated 14.08.2017 no duty is leviable on the goods imported. Therefore, I find that the demand of duty of Rs. 10,14,542.50 under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 against the Bill of Entry No.358899 dated 14.08.2007 does not hold goods. Accordingly, the question of demand of interest under Section 18AB ibid does not arise. I find that the importer vide letter dated 21.01.2008 had requested the Department to re-assess the Bill of Entry No.358899 dated 14.08.2007 in view of the revised invoice dated 11.01. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
