2011 (3) TMI 1277

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onfiscation and allowed the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh only) and penalties were imposed. The demand was confirmed after denying the benefit of Notification No. 26/2000 read with Notification No. 19/2000-Cus. (N.T.) and after re-classifying the goods under chapter heading 25151220 of Customs Tariff as rough marbles. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case is that Appellant made import of marble slabs declaring the same as polished marble slabs from Sri Lanka from their subsidiary company and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 26/2000 read with Notification No. 19/2000-Cus. The goods were provisionally released as the import was made from subsidiary company and the issue of valuation ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The contention is also that the Revenue is not relying upon any expert opinion or trade opinion whether the slabs in question were polished or not. It is only visual examination by the visiting officer to say that the slabs were not completely polished hence denial of benefit of Notification is not sustainable. It is also submitted that the dispute in respect of payment of CVD duty in respect of polished marble slabs imported by the Appellant was settled by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court vide order dated 18-5-2006 held that polished marble which has been imported by the Appellant into India cannot be termed as manufacture of that goods in India. The contention is that even in the year 2005-2006 i.e. after the imports in question before Ho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to the provisions of clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) of this rule and rule 8. 7. Revenue is denying the benefit of Notification on the ground that as the marble slabs were not completely polished at the country of import therefore benefit is not available to the Appellant. We have gone through the evidence on record which is by way of statements of the Director as well as the employee. The Director of the importing firm in his detailed statement gave the details of the equipment/machinery available at their factory in Sri Lanka and also the processes undertaken including polishing on the rough marble imported into Sri Lanka. The Revenue is only relying on the statement of employee where he simply stated that some polishing is required....