TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1067X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Precipitated Calcium Carbonate. It is a matter of common knowledge that the word precipitated preceding to Calcium Carbonate itself indicates that the goods under reference are not obtained as natural resources and thus classifiable under Chapter 25 but it is a manufactured item, classifiable under Chapter 28. The order is well reasoned and is properly backed by opinion of chemical analyst. We therefore find no merits in the grounds taken by the appellant and find that the impugned order is sustainable. The appeal is therefore dismissed. - CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 11562 OF 2016-DB - FINAL ORDER NO. A / 11554 /2023 - Dated:- 20-7-2023 - HON'BLE MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) , MR. RAJU And HON'BLE MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) , MR. SOMESH ARO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onate. Accordingly, the Department during adjudication as well as in the course of appeal decided the classification to be under Tariff Heading No. 2836500. We also find that during the course of hearing before the original Adjudicating Authority, the importer had waived SCN and the option of personal hearing and requested to finalize bill of entry and release the goods. It had also agreed to pay the penalty as Commissioner of custom may fix to order release of the goods and also submitted that in view of their financial and commercial losses, they are seeking release of the subject goods at the earliest. 4. We have gone through the reasoning of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals), in the matter as appearing at pg. 28 para 15-20, which is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rystallization: even if considered on its face value, does not contradict above said evidences especially the report of the Chemical Examiner at Kandla. Had the goods been what it has been claimed to be, the test report would not declare it to be Precipitated Calcium Carbonate. It is not disputed that the chemical composition of both the items is same. Thus, this argument does not in any manner favour their case. Also, I find that the department has relieved by placing on record two main evidences viz. (i) relevant examination report of the goods, duly recorded in the presence of independent Panchas as well as in the presence of authorised representative of M/s. Divine Shipping P. Ltd., who are the authorized Custom Broker Agent of the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... them. The contents of Para (viii) exemplify as to how insignificant it is to send the sample for re-test though no such request was made for such re-test, as it transpires from the records of the case. At said Para. (viii) it is mentioned that if they were given a copy of test report and given some breathing time to think on re-testing of the samples. then they could have got the opportunity to lead some evidence and could have established that the test result the Customs Laboratory is not in consonance with the IS standard and they could have established their case by cross-examining the chemical examiner. Such a line of argument arrears to be ridiculing the appeal and defense mechanism available to litigants. Further, in absence of any sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods, which were claimed to be Uncoated Calcite Powder and falling under CTH 2530-9030 The value thereof was considered to be in terms of guidelines issued by the Directorate Valuation, which are not disputed in a routine manner. When the classification was found to be altogether in the above discussed facts and circumstances of the case, it is obvious that the earli valuation would not hold. Subsequent valuation done, in lines of the same guidelines, cann disputed in a routine manner and especially in the manner as it has been done in the instant case Therefore. I find that impugned order, in so far it determines afresh the value of the goods umfer import is concerned, does not call for any interference. 19. In so far as the penalty i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y malafide to wrongly avail the benefits of the Notification No. 46 2011- Cus. dated 01-06-2011 and have instead chosen to make bald statements and surmises against quasi-judicial authority. 20. In so far as order for payment of Interest under Section 28AA of the said Act is concerned, the only argument made is that there is no short levy or short payment of duty and therefore proposal in this regards does not hold water. The factum of payment of differential duty to the tune of Rs. 3,87,903/- by the said Appellants on 06-11-2015 is found to be contrary to the above argument that there is no short payment. Therefore, I find that the order with regard to recovery of Interest under Section 28AA of the said Act is found to proper and leg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
