1994 (8) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Respondents. [Order per : K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)]. -  The facts in this appeal, briefly, are that the appellants, herein, imported through Bombay Customs House in April, 1981 a consignment of synthetic waste. Finding that partially the consignment was damaged, the appellants arranged for a survey report while taking delivery of the goods. After clearance of the goods they filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Customs Act, 1962. These circumstances are, firstly, the Collector (Appeals) has passed the impugned order without affording an effective opportunity of hearing to the appellants as set out in ground (II) of their appeal before the Tribunal. The Collector (Appeals) has also mis-construed the claim of the appellants as a refund claim of duty paid on shortages, whereas the Assistant Collector's ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....about the survey and the photo copy of the letter dated 22-8-1981 on record also contains what appears to be acknowledgement of receipt over the rubber stamp of Assistant Collector `E' Group. In this context, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kasturi & Sons v. Collector of Customs - 1985 (22) E.L.T. 161 regarding the scope of Section 22 of Customs Act, 1962 where damage to goods is claim....