https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98931 The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal for a refund of duty paid on 11 lost coils beyond the limitation period, citing sufficient evidence supporting the claim. The Tribunal upheld evidence of loss during storage, contrary to the Department's assertion of full consignment delivery, leading to the acceptance of the importer's claim. Disagreeing with the Department's requirement for a customs survey under Section 23, the Tribunal emphasized the Asst. Commissioner's satisfaction of loss for refund sanction. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified the distinction between "clearance for home consumption" and passing a clearance order, attributing safe custody responsibility of imported cargo to the Port Trust, not the importer. en-us Mon, 01 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:22:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98931 The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal for a refund of duty paid on 11 lost coils beyond the limitation period, citing sufficient evidence supporting the claim. The Tribunal upheld evidence of loss during storage, contrary to the Department's assertion of full consignment delivery, leading to the acceptance of the importer's claim. Disagreeing with the Department's requirement for a customs survey under Section 23, the Tribunal emphasized the Asst. Commissioner's satisfaction of loss for refund sanction. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified the distinction between "clearance for home consumption" and passing a clearance order, attributing safe custody responsibility of imported cargo to the Port Trust, not the importer. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 01 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98931