2005 (6) TMI 335

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ramakrishnappa, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. -  This is an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 33/2002, dated 5-4-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Cochin. 2. The facts of the case are as follows :- The appellant M/s. Kerala State Science and Technology Museum cleared a consignment containing zoom projector and X-Y movi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... exist at the time of importation and clearance of goods. Therefore he rejected the appeal. The appellants are aggrieved over the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. Shri Manoj Pillai learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Shri R.V. Ramakrishnappa learned DR for the Revenue. 4. The learned Advocate submitted that even as early as 22-12-98, they applied to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he registration is valid from 20-7-2001. It only says that the registration is valid up to 31-8-2004. Therefore, the observation of the respondent that the registration is valid from 20-7-2001 is obviously erroneous. In other words the learned advocate opined that the registration should be deemed to be valid even from the date of import of the consignment. Hence he requested that the benefit of e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with DSIR from the whole of duty of Customs provided they produce at the time of importation, a certificate from the Head of the Institution that the said goods are required for research purposes only. In this case, at the time of importation, there was no registration at all. Ultimately the registration was issued on 20th July, 2001. The appellant vehemently contends that the registration certif....