2015 (10) TMI 2444

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as under: The appellant filed shipping bill dated 26.09.2009 for the impugned goods. On examination of the goods 933 bags of rice weighing 17682 kgs. were found to be appearing to be of length 7mm and the remaining 11732 bags weighing 222288 kgs. appeared to contain rice of length less than 7 mm/ non-basmati rice. Export of non-basmati rice was prohibited during the relevant time as per Notification No.38(RE-2007) 2004-2009 dated 15.10.2007 as amended by Notification No. 55(Re-2008)/2004-2009 dated 05.11.2008 issued by Ministry of Commerce & Industry, New Delhi. The goods were tested and as per test report received from the Deputy Agricultural Marketing Adviser, Chandigarh the impugned rice did not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... which has clearly held after testing the impugned goods that the length and L/B ratio has not been conformed as per Notification No. 55(RE-2008)/2004 dated 05.11.2008 of the Deptt. of Commerce and the samples are not conformed as basmati rice. The contention of the appellant that during the physical examination 933 bags were found to contain rice of length 7mm and therefore the report of the Deputy Agricultural Marketing Adviser is at variance is not tenable because the show cause notice merely stated that on physical examination, the rice in 933 bags appeared to be of 7 mm length. Further length of 7mm does not automatically makes rice basmati rice. What was allowed to be exported was basmati rice of length 7 mm or above. Thus, the repor....