9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re-melting scraps ingots of iron or steel' and claiming the benefit of exemption under Sl. No.202 of Notification No.21/02-Cus., dated 01.03.02. Department, on physical examination, objected to the Appellants' claim that the imported goods are scrap, it was of the opinion that these goods are in nature secondary / defective / rejected / serviceable material. Appellants waived show cause Notice. A personal Hearing was held on 14- 07-2010. Commissioner passed Order-in-Original No.40/2011/CC(I), JNCH dated 15.07. 10 was passed confirming differential duty of Rs. 7,62,622 and imposing redemption fine of Rs. 10,00,000 and penalty of Rs. 4,00,000. The same is under challenge. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants Shri T. Vishwanathan sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CESTAT MUM., * Prince Fortified Steels Vs CC - 2018-TIOL-2299-CESTAT- 2.1. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the imported goods satisfy the definition of scrap as per Note 6(A) of Section XV and do not confirm to the definition of Note 2(n) of Chapter 72 (for channels) and definition of 2(k) of Chapter 72 (for coils); therefore, the imported goods are correctly classifiable under Heading 72.04 of the Customs Tariff and are eligible for exemption under Notification No.21/02-Cus; the entire consignment was melting scrap only; 'scrap' bought as stock lot is bound to contain articles in different shapes and forms including some serviceable material which are considered as scrap in the exporting country; it does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. CC -2009 (244) ELT 146 (Tri- Bang); * CC Vs. O.P. Steels Ltd. - 2001 (135) ELT 608 (Tri-Chennai); * CC Vs. Kamatchi Sponge and Power Ltd., - 2016-TIOL-1489-CESTAT-MAD 2.3. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that as far as value is concerned, the value declared at the time of import is the price actually paid by the Appellants to their supplier; there is no allegation of extra payment to the supplier over and above the invoice price; thus, genuineness of the transaction value is also not doubted; therefore, there is no occasion to invoke Rule 10 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of the Imported Goods) Rules, 2007; hence, the transaction value in the present case has to be accepted for the purpose of cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of the examination conducted at the time of clearance, department opined that the impugned goods were secondary / defective / rejected stock comprising of stainless-steel U and C channels of grade 410 (magnetic) and HR coils / strips of grade 410 (magnetic). The appellants submit that the examination report was not given to them. Learned AR submits that as the show-cause notice was waived by the appellants, the examination report could not be given to them. The appellants further submitted that no examination by a Chartered Engineer was conducted; pre-shipment inspection certificate and certificate issued by M/s. Alloys and Metal Test Services, Mumbai were ignored. Also, the request of the appellants for mutilating the goods before cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
