2006 (7) TMI 81

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oratory (NML), Chennai. NML, in their report dated 7-2-2002, certified the goods to be of not confirming to AISI 304 grade. However, in response to a requisition from the Department, NML clarified in their letter dated 27-2-2002 that the goods, though apparently of seconds quality in visual examination, still confirmed to AISI 304 grade in terms of chemical composition. Subsequently, the above Bill of Entry was withdrawn and a fresh Bill of Entry for warehousing was filed wherein the goods were declared as "STAINLESS STEEL COIL SECOND QUALITY GRADE AISI 304" and the unit price of the goods was declared as Indian rupee equivalent to USD 1060 per MT. In the wake of this warehousing Bill of Entry, which was filed by the importer after giving u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cumstances, it cannot be said that the goods were misdeclared. Hence, according to learned consultant, it was not correct on the part of the Commissioner to confiscate the goods or to impose penalty. We have heard learned SDR also, who reiterates the findings of the Commissioner. 3.We have considered the submissions. In the original Bill of Entry (for home consumption) filed by the appellants, they declared the goods as "Stainless Steel Coil AISI 304". In that Bill of Entry, they claimed DEEC benefit, which was available only to stainless steel coils of prime quality. This Bill of Entry was withdrawn in the wake of NML's report to the effect that the goods could be considered to be of seconds quality though conforming to AISI 304 grade. ....