Mandatory examination by higher customs officers required for notification benefit; lower-level inspection held insufficient and challenge failed.

Compliance with the notification was treated as requiring examination of the goods by the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, because that higher-level scrutiny was intended to ensure proper identification of re-exported goods and prevent misuse of the benefit. Examination by a lower-ranking officer was held insufficient, and the Tribunal's finding of non-compliance was upheld. The Court also declined to reappraise the factual conclusion in appellate jurisdiction, finding no perversity in the Tribunal's interpretation or its application of the notification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that compliance with the notification required examination of the goods by the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner and in denying the benefit of the notification for non-compliance with that mandatory requirement.

Analysis: The appeal challenged the Tribunal's finding that the notification made examination at the level of the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner a mandatory condition for identification of the re-exported goods. The Court accepted the Tribunal's view that examination by an officer of lower rank did not satisfy the requirement, as the higher-level scrutiny was intended to prevent misuse of the notification and to secure proper identification of the goods. The Court also held that it would not reappraise the factual finding in appellate jurisdiction and found no perversity in the Tribunal's conclusion.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's interpretation of the notification and its finding of non-compliance were upheld, and the challenge failed.

---