TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the ground that CRCL is fully equipped to test the goods. Held that:- The appellant has referred to Circular No.43/2017. Customs dated 16.11.2017, clarifying that CRCL has shortlisted the items whose samples cannot be tested in their Laboratories at present and also identified the Lab, where such samples could be tested. Natural Calcite Powder is one of the specified products which CRCL Lab is unable to test. There is no merit in Revenue's appeal - appeal dismissed. - APPEAL Nos. C/71137-71138/2016-CU[DB] - C/A/72157-72158/2018-CU[DB] - Dated:- 7-8-2018 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR for Appellant Shri Vaibhav Dixit (Adv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... test the samples due to lack of certain testing equipments with them and returned back the samples to the Customs Authorities. In a reply under RTI Act, given to one of appellant business colleague, where in they sought details of the equipments/machines installed/purchased by CRCL after 13.09.2013 (i.e. after the date when CRCL returned the samples without testing on account of non possession of equipments) for testing samples of Calcite Powder/Natural Calcium Carbonate. The CRCL vide letter dated 25.07.2014 stating that:- No new equipments/machines have been installed/purchased specifically for testing the sample of calcite powder/calcium carbonate after 13.09.2013. On account of incapability of conducting test of subject product by CRCL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , New Delhi gave test reports by declaring samples as of Uncoated Precipitated Calcium Carbonate . A perusal of the test report shows that the same was prepared by one Mr. S.K. Singh, Chemical Examiner who gave the test report only on the basis of oil absorption test‟ by relying on Indian Standard 8767-1978 and dealt with the Query No.9 10 of the test memo as under:- 9. Not related with testing. 10. No such test is recommended in Indian Standard. 3. Another test report was also prepared by the same chemical examiner i.e. Sh. S.K. Singh on same date i.e. on 07.05.2014 wherein he preferred to cover only first 05 tests while the rest 05 tests were left and were not even recorded in his report After having knowledge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CD, Loni, the appellant had no option but to get their goods cleared after depositing Bank Guarantee of duty at higher rates i.e. the rates applicable to Precipitated Calcium Carbonate falling under chapter 28 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellant has requested the Customs Authorities many a times for retesting the samples in any other NABL Lab, but the customs authority at ICD-Loni had not taken any action for sending the samples to any other laboratory equipped to test the samples as required by the test memo. In a similar matter, some other Importers filed a Writ Petition against the reports of CRCL for similar goods in the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad and demanded the retesting of their samples at any NABL accredited Lab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tees of the appellant, which were filed against the provisional release and copies of the said letters were addressed to the appellant. The appellant has paid the differential duty but under protest. However no formal order for the finalization of the provisional assessment has been issued. Further the Appellant had requested the Customs authorities many a times for re-testing the samples in any other NABL Lab but not considered. Till date, the Customs Authority at ICD-Loni had not taken any action for sending the samples to any other laboratory equipped to test the samples as required by the test memo. 5. It is seen that assessments were finalised and letters for enforcement of bank guarantees were issued to the banks with a copy to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
