TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdered for re-classification against heading no. 7102 3910 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975 with duty liability of 2% for demanding differential duty. The impugned order is categorical in its finding of reclassification that the reports of Gemological Institute of India and Trade Panel Members as well as that of GIA India Pvt Ltd were clear that the goods did not conform to the declaration. It is also seen that the circular no. 35/2009-Cus dated 29th December 2009 of Director General of Export Promotion was discarded. While the impugned goods may not be rough diamonds as mined and may have undergone working before its import, the reports do not conclusively establish that these were cut and polished diamonds on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fine of ₹10,00,000, and the imposition of penalties of ₹2,00,000 under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 and ₹1,00,000 under section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 are sought to be set aside. 2. Opinion of Gemological Institute of India (GII) was sought on sample of six diamonds drawn and proceedings were proposed to be initiated upon their report of 23rd October 2012 that four of these were heat processed heat treated (HPHT) Type IIa with other two being cut and polished diamonds which was concurred with in the report of Trade Panel Members dated 31st October 2012 along with recommendation for enhancement of value. 3. It is contended by Learned Counsel for the appellant that the said diamonds had been worked on to cra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Authorized Representative emphatically draws upon the findings to defend the impugned order and further contends that description in the Kimberly Process Certificate is not sufficient evidence of the condition of the diamonds in view of the instructions contained in circular no. 53/2003-Cus dated 23rd June 2003 of Central Board of Excise Customs. 5. In terms of notification no. 12/2012-Cus dated 17th March 2012, both rough diamonds and diamonds including lab grown diamonds semi processed, half cut or broken are exempted from duty on import. The goods were entered for import on the claim for classification against heading no. 7102 3100 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975 attracting nil rate of duty but was ordered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertified the classification of the goods under Tariff Heading 7102.31 and classified the goods as Rough Diamonds-for the purpose of international trade and also that the impugned goods are 'Rough Diamonds' as declared by them in the Bill of Entry as the goods were accompanied by the Kimberley Process Certificate. In this regard, I find that the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide Circular No.53/2003-Cus dated 23.06.2003 has prescribed the procedure to be adopted while importing Rough Diamonds. It has clearly prescribed that Rough Diamonds cannot be imported without a valid Kimberley Process Certificate issued by the Competent Authority of the exporting country. The said Circular, at Para 8 has further clarified that under KPC S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
