TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (6) TMI 602
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cation of mica blocks sought to be exported by the appellant under the shipping bill dated 4-2-1998 by considering the same as mica scrap. Appellants have been given an option to pay redemption fine of Rs. 1.50 lakhs. A penalty of Rs. 50,000/- has also been imposed under the provision of Section 114. 3.  The dispute relates to the question whether 'Mica Blocks' sought to be exported by the appellants were in fact 'Mica Scrap', a canalized item - the nominated canalizing agency being M/s. MMTC Ltd. Examination of the goods was conducted on 27-2-1998 which was jointly attended by the technical representative of MMTC, EIB officials, AC (Docks) and Dock Officers. The representative of MMTC gave his opinion on the reverse of the Shipping B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication being based on visual tests, depends on individual opinion and such quality classification requires to be done by a large number of individual persons since it is highly influenced not only various circumstances and attending factors but upon mood of the Inspector. The appellants' contention is that it was wrong to place absolute reliance on the opinion of representative of M/s. MMTC who is not a recognized expert but on the contrary is a jealous competitor of the appellants. The customs ought to have referred the matter for inspection by recognized expert agency like Export Inspection Agency whose reports are accepted for determination of quality classification for export goods. The subject goods - Mica Block (untrimmed) - were mea....