2005 (10) TMI 382

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. -  This is an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 533/99, dated 10-9-1999 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai. 2. Brief facts of the case are as follows. The appellants are a 100% EOU. They exported their goods. The foreign importer found some of the goods defective. Therefore, the goods were sent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ths in terms of Notification No. 158/95. The original authority confirmed a demand of Rs. 2,83,186/-. The appellants approached the Commissioner (Appeals). After going through the records, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appellants' appeal. Hence the appellants have come before this Tribunal for relief. 3. Smt. Prameela, ld. Counsel appeared for the appellants and Smt. R. Bhagya De....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Section 20 of the Customs Act deals with goods re-imported. Notification No. 158/95 is issued under Section 20 of the Customs Act. Therefore, as regards re-export, the correct Notification applicable would be Notification No. 158/95. Even, the appellants have executed the Bond in terms of the above Notification. As per the Bond within a period of six months they should have exported. That period ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ough the Bond. In terms of the Bond, re-export should have been done within six months. Another factor is that re-import is for the purpose of re-working/replacement. In the instant case the lower authorities have found that what is re-imported is cotton fabrics and what is re-exported is Nylon fabrics. Ld. Counsel pointed out that while repairing the jackets some Nylon pieces were stitched and th....