TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... signment has been exported after the re-importation to the buyer in Vietnam and also appellant has deposited the DEPB-benefit to the Department and hence, there is no loss to the Revenue - In this case, export consignment could not pass the test of FDA, and accordingly, the appellant has no option for re-importation of goods which has done in this case. The Commissioner order of refusal of extensi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the basis of order No. 29/KOL/CUS/PORT/13/10. In the said order Commissioner has rejected the delay of extension of time beyond one year for the re-importation of export consignment of the Appellant. 2. By the Impugned Order, Ld. Adjudicating Authority, that is Commissioner (Port), has not allowed extension of time beyond one year for re-importation of the goods exported earlier under the No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Entry No. IF60 dt. 18.02.2005 claiming the benefit under notification No. 94/96-Cus dt. 16.12.1996. As per the notification, the reimportation is required to be done within a period of one year for the consignment under the date of export which was obviously not done in this case. According, the Appeal is before us against the impugned orders. 4. We have heard the Parties. 5. Ld. Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore this Tribunal. 7. There is another appeal on this linked issue as Appeal No. 359/10 which is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeal) which was passed in pursuance of the assessment order by the Ld. Assisstant Commissioner denying the benefit of Notification No. 94/96 as amended. 8. We have heard the both sides and perused the Appeal records regarding the issue involved in both the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
