TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (10) TMI 478
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....porting waste paper and box board cuttings for pulping at their plant and thereafter manufacturing duplex boards from the said pulp. The imports were made some time in Jan. 2000 and a Bill of Entry was filed which was examined and samples taken for testing purpose and thereafter re-examined in April 2000. On learning that the consignment contained certain quantity of white card board sheets, which as per the Chemical Examiner's report were of four different sizes and had characteristics of one side coated multiply board, and it was opined by the said Chemical Examiner that after observing the mode of packing and appearance these four types of thick board do not appear to be waste paper and box board cutting. The appellants made requests for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12(a) has come to a finding that "even if part of the consignment was found to be card-board there is no evidence to show that the appellant is a party to such supply" and this led him to reduce the RF and penalties imposed. 2. Ld. Advocate Ms. Rukmani Menon for the appellants submitted that their case is covered by the decision of Ram Paper Mills Ltd. reported at 1991 (53) E.L.T. 40 (T) and the goods under import should be considered as waste paper, since they have offered first time as far back in March and thereafter repeatedly, to mutilate the alleged serviceable goods, in their own factory and supply end-use certificate to satisfy the authorities that the paper under import was used for pulping purpose only, there was no case o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and with consent of both the parties, after granting waiver of pre-deposit, we take up the appeal for final decision as the issue lies on a short compass and is covered. We find (a) the judgment of the Supreme Court in CC, Bombay v. Hardik Industrial Corporation has laid down in para-7 thereof which reads as under :- "7. The point of time at which the respondent made the offer of mutilation is relevant. If, at the very outset, the respondent had asked for mutilation of the goods, that might have been a different matter....." In the present case, we find that the appellant's conduct in seeking mutilation of the goods by sending an end-use certificate that imported goods have been converted into pulp was made on 13-4-2000 is much befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the goods lying in the docks at Chennai were found to be extensively wet and were tearing very easily and in their present state and on that date, 22 pallets under import could not be used for any other purpose excepting recycling as waste paper. This Survey Report was not available and the lower authorities who had determined the goods and adjudicated in absence of this condition of the goods before order of clearance was passed. From the Survey Report it cannot be made as to whether goods lost their serviceability on 24-7-2000 or a date prior to that. The earlier examination reports and Chemical Examiner's opinion is silent on this aspect of serviceability. The fact, however, remains that goods lying in the docks are no longer serviceab....