TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 382
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otification No. 94/1996-Cus dated 16.12.1996. Earlier the appellant had exported 42270.668 MTs of HSD per vessel MT Sonata vide Shipping Bill No. F-15 dated 15.12.2007 covered under 03 bills of lading all dated 24.02.2007 under Advance Authorization as well EPCG scheme. At the time of export, samples of the export goods were drawn from the storage tank situated within the appellant's refinery as also from the ship's tanks after loading. The test report dated 21/22.02.2007 of the samples of export goods which were drawn in the appellant's refinery and tested by the independent surveyor M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Pvt Ltd., appointed by the buyer, met with all the quality specifications of the product as per supply contract. As the indepe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ject duty amounting to Rs 4,37,55,486/- alongwith interest for finalization of the bill of entry which was adjudicated vide the impugned order-in-original wherein the adjudicating authority has finalized the provisional assessment inter-alia by charging and confirming the duty demand of Rs 4,37,55,486/- alongwith interest under Section 18(2) and (3) respectively of the Customs Act 1962." 3. Aggrieved by such an Order In Original, appellant preferred an appeal before the first appellant authority. The first appellant authority after following due process of law came to the conclusion that the Order In Original is correct. After coming to such a conclusion, the first appellant authority has rejected the appeal filed by the appellant hence th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red directly by them as they would have to face various legal proceedings for marketing adulterated goods. He would submit that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Petroplus International Marketing Fzco vs. CC, Mangalore 2006 (205) ELT 1041 (Tri. - Bang.), M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corpn Ltd vs. CCE., Vishakapatnam 2007 (210) ELT 407 (Tri. - Bang) and M/s Kuchchal Chemical Ltd., vs. CCE., Lucknow 2013 (288) ELT 585 (Tri. - Del.) would cover the proposition that the products need to be classified by the specifications given in the tariff. He would also submit that the appellant had in fact taken back these re-imported HSD to their refinery, purified and re-exported/cleared on payment of duty for home consumption. 5. Ld. Department....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uty of Rs 2 per ltr was leviable on imported HSD vide Section 116 of Finance Act. 9. On the above said factual matrix, the findings of the appellate authority are that the appellant having declared the goods which are exported as HSD, can not claim that what has been re-imported by them is other than HSD. The said HSD can not become other than HSD in the mid-sea and if it is so the benefit of exemption claimed under Notification No.94/96-cus and the difference of flash point of 34.5° C as against the minimum requirement of 35°C, being marginal difference does not make much difference coming to such findings, he has rejected the appeal. 10. At the out set, we would like to record that the issue involved to only whether the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per IS 1460-2000. 13. We find that he additional duty of Customs on HSD has been levied by Finance Act 1999 which indicates that the said duty will be levied on "HSD" in addition to any other duty chargeable on the said goods. It is seen that supplementary Notes to Ch 27 of Customs Tariff Act regarding what is to be considered as import of HSD, reads as under : "HSD means any Hydrocarbon oil conforming to Indian Standards Specifications of Bureau of Indian Standards IS : 1460:2000." The plain reading of above supplementary note would mean that in order to impose additional customs duty of Rs 2 per ltr on imported HSD it needs to be first concluded whether imported goods are HSD, by applying Standards of IS 1460-2000 specific....