Export of "Cow Crunch Upper Finished Leather" Appeals Dismissed, Confiscation Upheld Based on CLRI Reports

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI dismissed the appeals concerning the export of "Cow Crunch Upper Finished Leather." The Tribunal upheld the decision to confiscate consignments based on CLRI reports, despite the appellant's objections to discrepancies and outdated regulations. It was noted that the reliance on CLRI was justified, and the imposed fines and penalties were deemed reasonable. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following proper procedures in sample submissions and upheld the lower authorities' orders, affirming the redemption fine and penalties. The judgment was delivered on 26.02.2019.

---

---

Issues:
- Appeal involving export of "Cow Crunch Upper Finished Leather"
- Reliance on CLRI report for non-compliance with prescribed norms
- Discrepancy in CLRI reports and appellant's submissions
- Outdated DGFT Public Notice and technology advancements
- Request for retesting of samples after a decade
- Reasonableness of redemption fine and penalty imposed

Analysis:
The appeals revolved around the export of "Cow Crunch Upper Finished Leather" where the Appraising Officer doubted compliance with prescribed norms and sent samples to CLRI for expert opinion. CLRI's report led to the confiscation of consignments under the Customs Act, with redemption allowed upon payment of duties, fines, and penalties. The appellant challenged this decision, arguing that the reliance on CLRI's report was unjustified due to discrepancies. The appellant highlighted that their samples had earlier been certified as satisfactory by CLRI, questioning the authenticity of the adverse report. The appellant also criticized the outdated DGFT Public Notice from 1992 and emphasized technological advancements since then.

During the hearing, the appellant's counsel contended that the CLRI report was inaccurate and discriminatory, drawing parallels with medical test reports. However, the respondent's representative supported the reliance on CLRI's findings, stating they are the authorized agency. The Tribunal noted the requirement to send samples to CLRI as per the DGFT Public Notice, despite the appellant's claims of its obsolescence. The Tribunal emphasized that the CLRI reports, while contradictory, were based on samples sent by the appellant without following proper procedures.

The appellant's plea for retesting after a decade was dismissed, considering potential sample deterioration. The Tribunal found the adjudicating authorities' decisions reasonable, upholding the imposed fines and penalties as just and fair. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals, affirming the lower authorities' orders. The judgment was pronounced on 26.02.2019 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, with detailed analysis and reasoning provided for each issue raised during the proceedings.

---