Customs exemption denied where representative sampling and consistent test reports showed non-compliance with the ash-content condition.

Sampling was upheld where it was drawn in the presence of the importer's representative, who accepted the manner of sampling, and the sample was treated as representative of consignments from the same importer, commodity and vessel. The test results were consistent on two occasions and showed ash content above the prescribed limit, so the exemption condition was not satisfied. The absence of separate correspondence before the second test did not vitiate the result when the CHA had been informed. On that basis, denial of exemption under Customs Notification No. 21/2002 was justified and the assessment was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sampling procedure was invalid and whether exemption under the customs notification could be denied on the basis of the test reports showing ash content above the prescribed limit.

Analysis: The sample was drawn in the presence of the importer's representative, who recorded satisfaction with the manner of sampling, and the sample was treated as representative for all consignments since they related to the same importer, commodity, and vessel. The records also showed that the sample was tested twice, and both reports showed ash content above 12%. The absence of separate correspondence before the second test did not, by itself, discredit the result, especially when the importer's CHA was informed. On that material, the denial of exemption was found justified.

Conclusion: The challenge to sampling and testing failed, and denial of exemption under Customs Notification No. 21/2002 was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed and the orders of the lower authorities were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where sampling is taken in the presence of the importer's representative and the test reports consistently establish that the goods do not satisfy the exemption condition, the exemption can be denied and the assessment upheld.

---