2015 (9) TMI 85

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of consignments of arecanut, that were imported by the petitioner from Srilanka. In the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the condition requiring payment of 35% of the differential duty (on tariff date), stipulated as one of the conditions for the provisional clearance of the consignments imported by him. The facts in the writ petition would disclose that the petitioner had imported four consignments of arecanut from Srilanka, under cover of four bills of entry, all dated 29.12,2014. While seeking a clearance of the consignments, the petitioner had sought for the benefit of the concessional rate of customs duty, as applicable to arecanut imported from Srilanka in terms of Notification No.26/2000 dated 01.03.2000, which gave....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ne the Country of Origin for the purposes of the Notification in question. According to him, the customs authorities had reason to believe that the goods niether originated in Srilanka nor were goods, in respect of which substantial value addition had been brought about in Srilanka. For this reason, he would submit that the goods are prima facie not entitled to the concessional rate of duty as envisaged in the notification. He would contend that, in order to protect the interest of the revenue, a provisional release could be permitted only subject to the petitioner depositng substantial amounts towards the differential duty that would be payable, in case the benefit of the Notification was not available.  3. Considering the submissi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ith the conditions mentioned inExt.P17 communication, save for Condition No.3 therein, namely, the payment of differential duty (on tariff rate). While the payment that is required of the petitioner in Ext.P17 communication is 35% of the differential duty, I feel the respondents will be justified in insisting only on payment of 20% of the differential duty in the instant case, relying on the Customs (Provisional Assessment) Regulations. I, therefore, modify the said condition in Ext.P17 to read as "payment of 20% of differential duty (on tariff rate)", in lieu of "payment of 35% of differential duty (on tariff rate)" as mentioned in Ext.P17. Save for this limited modification, I do not see any reason to otherwise interfere with Ext.P17 comm....