Re-imported goods identity after repair upheld, with minor weight variation not defeating customs notification compliance.

Customs duty could not be sustained where re-imported jewellery was specifically identified as the same goods earlier exported, with the re-import documents cross-referencing the prior invoice and shipping bill. The assessing authority accepted identity of the goods at re-import and again at re-export after repair and reconditioning, and the minor weight variation was explained by the repair and resetting process. On those facts, condition No. 3 of Notification No. 158/95-Cus was treated as satisfied, so the duty demand was held unsustainable and the order confirming duty was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of customs duty could be sustained on the ground that the re-exported jewellery items were not the same goods as the re-imported items and that condition No. 3 of Notification No. 158/95-Cus dated 14.11.1995 was not fulfilled.

Analysis: The re-import documents specifically identified the 11 jewellery articles earlier exported, including serial-wise reference to the prior export invoice and shipping bill. The Bill of Entry for re-import was assessed on the satisfaction that the goods were the same as those earlier exported. The subsequent re-export was also assessed after repair and reconditioning, and the declarations showed that the variation in weight was attributable to the repair and resetting process. The difference in weight was held to be minor and consistent with such work. Since the assessing officer accepted the identity of the goods at both stages, there was no breach of the notification condition requiring satisfaction regarding identity of the goods.

Conclusion: The duty demand was not sustainable, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The order confirming customs duty was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where re-imported goods are duly identified as the same goods earlier exported and the re-export after repair or reconditioning is accepted by the assessing authority, a minor variation in weight by itself does not defeat compliance with the re-import notification condition or justify a duty demand.

---