TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mar, Member (T) Shri J.M. Sharma, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Madan, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per: S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. - Heard both sides. The appellant filed these appeals against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs. The present impugned order has passed in pursuant to the remand order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal while remanding the order held as under: "We have heard both sides and gone through the record. The ld, Counsel has contended that even if the export goods, which were declared as printed fabric made out of spun yarn at the time of export to Nepal under DEPB scheme, had not been found to be so, after the test by the Textile Testing Laboratory vide report dt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter is sent back to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision in the light of the discretions made above". 2. In the impugned order, Commissioner of Customs held that the goods exported by the appellant are not made out of spun yarn, therefore, they are not entitled for DEPB at S. No. 46-A of DEPB Schedule. The Commissioner of Customs further held that in respect of claim under entry at S. No. 47-A is to be decided by the DGFT. 3. The contention of the appellant is that Commissioner has not complied with the directions given in the remand order and had not considered their claim under entry at S. No. 47-A of DEPB Schedule, therefore, order is not sustainable. The appellant also submitted after relying upon the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the fabric is not made out of spun yarn. The adjudicating authority held that as the fabric is not made out of spun yarn, therefore, the benefit of S. No. 46-A of DEPB scheme is not available. This situation is accepted by the appellant. Now the appellant made claim at S. No. 47-A of DEPB Schedule, We find that as per the decision of the Tribunal relied upon by the appellant, the entitlement is to be decided by the DGFT authorities. In the impugned order, the authority under DGFT may issue necessary orders regarding the claim of the appellant at S. No. 47-A of the Schedule and this copy of the order has been forwarded to the DGFT. In these circumstances, we find no infirmity in the impugned order in this regard. 7. The appellant also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
