TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (3) TMI 692
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt and filed declaration of the goods imported. The Bills of Entry were assessed and duties were paid. The goods were assessed and classified under Customs Tariff Headings 7011.10 & 7008.10 of Central Excise Tariff for purpose of CVD at NIL rate. Demand notices were issued under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 and total C.V. Duty of Rs. 37,39,011/- was demanded as follows - Bill of Entry No. Date of Payment of Duty C.V. Duty in Rs. Reply Sent HD 0200774 8-2-91 1,90,146 8-8-91 HD 0200764 8-2-91 2,92,697 8-8-91 BE 9155 8-3-91 HD 302903 25-3-91 1,40,076 27-3-91 HD 0500219 2-5-91 1,53,130 3-5-91 HD 0702865 2-5-91  64,371 14-8-91 HD 0600348 2-6-92 10,88,667 HD 0801506 17-8-92  ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esent short levy of Rs.................." in other notices only a mention is made about the earlier assessment being 'not correct'. Only in one notice - (i.e. issued for BE No 1 + 0110, 881, dated 20-11-1992 the words are - "The "quartz exhaust tubings" covered by the Bill of Entry had been assessed on finally without levy of CV Duty which is correct. Actually, these goods are correctly classifiable under Heading 7001.90/7008.10 CET which attract levy of CV Duty @ 40% + 15% SED which results a short levy of............." but in all notices, no reasons or material is given as regards the nature of goods, or the reasons to charge the classification as assessed on BE already cleared. 3. The replies were sent in all cases, seeking to k....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....995 stated to be 'Notice for duty/deposit of penalty under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 which directed the appellants should pay the duty as determined within 15 days. If they wanted to represent against the said tentative conclusion, they were required to file a representation within 18 days. However, this order did not disclose the authority to whom such representation should be filed. This notice conveyed that, if nothing was heard from them, the matter will be decided on the basis of record. This notice was not signed by Collector of Customs (Appeals) but was signed by some "illegible" signature 'for Collector of Customs (Appeals)'. This was replied on 10-2-1995. A hearing was thereafter held by the Collector (Appeals) which r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assistant Collector, assessment group. In fact, except for one notice, no notice even proposes any alternative heading for classification. The reasons in the order of the Assistant Collector, therefore, determining the nature of the tubes under import are not available. It is not known how it has been determined, that the impugned goods are tubes which do not have narrowed ends nor fluorescent coating. In absence of material on record, the issue cannot be settled. No purpose, therefore, will be served by remanding the matter back to redetermine the matter based on inadequate and badly drafted notices. (c) We find from the chart extracted herein above, the imports have been effected over a period of time. Notic....