TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew of the said letter, there is a lot of factual similarity in this case with the matter of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (SEA PORT-IMPORT) CHENNAI VERSUS INDO DEUTSCHE TRADE LINKS AND ANR [ 2017 (3) TMI 488 - SUPREME COURT ] where it was held that classification under 7204 for used rails declared as Heavy Melting Scrap on importation was improper and product was correctly classifiable under Heading 7302, when assessee itself in a letter to Department admitted misdeclaring imported cut Rails as heavy melting scrap and requested for condonation of misdeclaration and admitted value declared to be under lower side and accepted its value for rectification. The order of Hon ble Supreme Court needs to be followed in the present matter - order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed impugned order under which he: (i) rejected the declared value in respect of the 87.350 MTS of Rail Material Scrap and re-determined the same as Rs. 31.36.067/- under rule 5 of CVR. 2007; (ii) ordered confiscation of the said goods under section 111(d) and 111(m) with redemption fine of Rs. 6 lakhs; (iii) imposed penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs under section 112(a); and (iv) ordered payment of duty and penalty under section 125(2). Being aggrieved, party preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) citing inter alia, the following grounds:- i. Impugned order is not a speaking order as the adjudicating authority has not dealt with the submissions made by the appellant vide letter dated 13.05.2013: ii. Appellant at no time intended to impor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner (Appeals) has been misled by them. The letter dated 14.05.2013 is being reproduced below:- 3. Department has further contended that in view of Chaudhary International Vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay as reported in 1999 (109) ELT 371 (Tribunal), the person who has given his consent of passing the order cannot be aggrieved person and also similar position was pronounced by the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vs. Virgo Steels as reported in 2002 (141) ELT 598 (S.C). It was also pleaded on behalf of the department that C.T.H 7302 specifically covers rails . HSN note on this heading provides that it covers all lengths of rails, all rails of the type normally used for railway or tramway track, irresp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under 7204 for used rails declared as Heavy Melting Scrap on importation was improper and product was correctly classifiable under Heading 7302, when assessee itself in a letter to Department admitted misdeclaring imported cut Rails as heavy melting scrap and requested for condonation of misdeclaration and admitted value declared to be under lower side and accepted its value for rectification. 4.1 We find that in view of letter dated 14.05.2013 cited (supra) there is a lot of factual similarity in this case with the matter of INDO DEUTSCHE TRADE LINKS cited (supra). We, therefore, all inclined to follow the order of Hon ble Supreme Court, in this matter and accordingly since letter as above was not considered by the Commissioner (Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
