TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (9) TMI 370
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issue involved in both the cases is identical, we take up both the cases together for the disposal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants filed a Shipping Bill for export of 62% Iron Ore Fines claiming exemption of export duty in excess of Rs. 50/- per MT in terms of Customs Notification No. 62/2007, dated 3-5-2007. The shipping bill was assessed provisionally on payment of duty @ Rs. 50/- per MT pending test report. The samples were drawn in the presence of the representatives of the exporters. On testing, the samples were found to be containing Fe content more than 62%. After due adjudication process, the adjudicating authority ordered for finalization of provisionally assessed shipping bill denying the exemption ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondent dated 13-6-2008 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Though the reasons set out by the petitioner for seeking condonation of the delay of 146 days in preferring the appeal do not appear to be substantial, we are of the view that having regard to the petitioner having on the merits of the appeal before the CESTAT, an eminently arguable case and the delay not being inordinate, are of the opinion that discretion ought to have been exercised by the CESTAT, for condonation of delay on reasonable terms. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Rajasekar Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2, we consider it appropriate, in the facts and circumstances of this case, to allow the writ petition. The delay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... required test fee of Rs. 150/- per MT which was complied with. It is the submission that the retest report which was received on 7-2-2009, indicates that the Fe content of the consignment exported by both the appellants is approximately 61.0%. It is the submission that since the Fe content is less than 62%, the appellants are entitled to benefit of the Notification No. 62/2007, dated 3-5-2007. It is the submission that during the pendency of the appeals before the Tribunal, the lower authority has encashed the Bank Guarantee executed by the appellants. 5. The learned SDR, on the other hand, submits that both the lower authorities did not have the retest report when the matter was heard and adjudicated by them. It is her submission ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the Central Revenue Laboratory-New Delhi. The result has been received and the CRCL informed the results of said re-test as furnished below : Shipping Bill/Date Exporter (M/s.) Quantity (MT) FE content as per RE-TEST results of the CRCL-DELHI. 21/29-5-07 HKT Mining Pvt. Ltd., Bellary 10000 61.0% 20/29-5-07 Bharat Mines & Minerals, Bellary 34000 60.8%" It is seen from the above reproduced letter of the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, there is no dispute that retest was granted and the result was communicated as Fe content as 61.0%, which would entitle the benefit of Customs Notification No. 62/2007-Cus., dated 3-5-2007. As regards the prayer made by the ld. SDR for remanding the mat....