TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 764X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st, after conducting the test as mentioned in the respective test report, have been subjected to further test by any other agency to discard the Dy. Chief Chemist s test report on the carotenoid contents of the imported crude palm oil. In the present case, the appellant could not be able to justify that carotenoid contents is more than 500 mg/kg contrary to the Dy. Chief Chemist s Report, and consequently eligible to the benefit of said notification - the observations recorded by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) in upholding the orders of the Adjudicating Authority does not warrant interference. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - C/147-148/2011 - Final Order Nos. A/86579-86580/2019-WZB - Dated:- 5-9-2019 - Dr. D.M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals), who in turn, rejected their appeals. Hence, the present appeals. 3. The Learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the test report of Dy. Chief Chemist is not backed by any authority or research, hence, the said report cannot be given credence. He has submitted that the imported crude palm oil was purchased by them on high sea sale basis from M/s. Anand Mohata Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur. He has further submitted that there was a delay of 16 days between the date of sampling and the date of testing by the laboratory. It is his contention that the Adjudicating authority has taken Lab date appearing on the test report as the date of testing. But, the Lab date is nothing more than the date of receipt of sample in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so as to determine the admissibility of the exemption notification claimed by the appellant. On testing the samples in the case of Bill of Entry No. 716, the carotenoid content was found to be 399.1 mg/kg and in the case of Bill of Entry No. 716, the carotenoid contents found to be 448 mg/kg. It is his contention that since in both the cases, the CO contents was less than 500 mg/kg, therefore, the appellants are not eligible to the benefit of exemption Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., dated 1-3-2002. He has submitted that the appellant had never challenged the test report by filing appeal before CRCL, Delhi nor any request for cross-examination of Dy. Chief Chemist was made. Therefore, the test reports are binding and ought to have been accep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the relevant period against the respective Bills of Entry. The conditions in the said notification reads as follows :- A. Extract of Not. No. 21/2002-Cus., dated 1-3-2002 as it originally stood : Table S. No. Chapter or Heading No. or sub-heading No. Description of goods Standard rate Additional duty rate Condition No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 34. 15.11 Crude pam oil and its fractions, of edible grade, in loose or bulk form 65% - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal by the appellant even though subsequently, the demand notice was issued for recovery of differential duty, denying the benefit of said exemption notification to the appellant on the basis of the said report. The Learned Advocate has referred to a report subsequently obtained by the appellant from a private laboratory viz. Ganesh Research Foundation, New Delhi, which is dated 18-12-2003 to rebut the earlier report of DyCC. It is their contention that the average loss as per the said report of Ganesh Research Agency is 21.47 mg/kg per day and in the event, the delay in drawing samples and the test reports i.e. 16 days is considered, then the carotenoid contents value in the Dy. Chief Chemist s report would be higher and accordingly in b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
