TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds to the user buyer in Saudi Arabia. Further, on rejection by the buyer, the appellant was obligated to re-import the goods to mitigate his loss. Further, admittedly, the re-imported goods have been found to be CPC. The minor variation in weight is normal variation in the weight of the goods, due to normal loss in transit. As per para 1.05 (Clause B) of Chapter 1 of FTP 2015-2020, provides that in case of change of policy from free to restricted/prohibited etc. the imports or export already made before the date of such regulation/restrictions will not be effected. Admittedly, the export in this case was made through shipping bill dated 01.12.2017, which is before the date of restriction imposed vide aforementioned Notifications - CPC wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tedly re-imported goods was found to be 19,526.20 KGs, against declared weight of 19,690 Kgs. Hence it could not be established that the said imported goods pertained to those goods which were exported from India, as per shipping bill dated 01.12.2017, attached. Also, re-import of the calcined Petroleum coke appeared not allowable as per applicable Notifications, Circulars. (iii) As per DGFT Notification No. 42/2015-2020 dtd. 23.10.2018, the import of pet coke for fuel purpose is prohibited. However, import of pet coke is free for cement, lime Kiln, calcium carbide, 'gasification Industries, and graphite electrode industries for use as feed stock or in the manufacturing process. Further, Aluminum industry can import calcined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s-. Only registered industrial units with valid consent from SPCBs/PCC shall be permitted to directly import pet coke and consignment shall be in the name of user industrial unit for their own use only. Import of Pet Coke for the purpose of trading shall not be permitted. (vii) Further, identity of goods exported as per shipping bill was not established with respect to BOE filed. Also, the importer is engaged in trading of goods and not connected with any manufacturing activity. (ix) Accordingly the Show Cause Notice No 01/DC/CUS/MDP/ 2020 dated 08.06.2020 was issued to appellant by the Deputy Commissioner, ID Mandideep proposing therein: Confiscation of 19,526.20 Kgs of calcined Petroleum Coke valued at Rs. 6,06,156.22/-, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le, they have returned part of the goods after negotiation and agreement between the parties. The learned Counsel have referred to the correspondence between the parties regarding the goods which were exported. The Director of the appellant had also travelled to Saudi Arabia to settle the dispute, and agreed to take back 20 bags equivalent to 20,000 kg of CPC. Accordingly, NAJD Steel re-exported the rejected CPC packed in 20 Jumbo bags mentioning net weight at 19.690 kg valued at USD 8072.90/- vide re-export invoice dated 21.01.2020 to the appellant. As the buyer NAJD Steel had made advance payment for these goods at the time of purchase, they also advised the appellant to refund the amount, giving swift details. The goods were booked vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondition Clause (d) mentions that the goods are the same which were exported. 6. Learned Counsel further urges that the Court below have erred in relying on Notification No. 42/15-16-Cus dated 23.10.2018 which provides for restriction on import of petroleum coke, and it is allowed to be imported only on actual user basis for the specified purpose. The notification also provides for import of raw petroleum coke for manufacture of calcined petroleum coke, subject to quantitative restriction. 7. Learned Counsel further draws attention to para 1.05 of Chapter 1 of Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-2020 (as amended), wherein in Clause B of para 1.05, it is provided- in case of change of policy from free to restricted/ prohibited/ state trading or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort benefit on the impugned goods. Thus, I find that both the identity of the goods is also established and also that the appellant had genuinely exported the goods to the user buyer in Saudi Arabia. Further, on rejection by the buyer, the appellant was obligated to re-import the goods to mitigate his loss. Further, admittedly, the re-imported goods have been found to be CPC. The minor variation in weight is normal variation in the weight of the goods, due to normal loss in transit. I further find that as per para 1.05 (Clause B) of Chapter 1 of FTP 2015-2020, provides that in case of change of policy from free to restricted/prohibited etc. the imports or export already made before the date of such regulation/restrictions will not be effect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
