TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 1398
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Petitioner : Shri Sarju S. Mehta (Chartered Accountant) For the Respondent : Shri J. Nair, Authorised Representative ORDER Per Mr. P. K. Das Common issue is involved in these appeals and therefore, all are taken up together for disposal. 2. The appellants filed these applications for Early Hearing of the appeals. After hearing both the sides, we find that the issues involved in these appeals appear to be covered by the decision of the Tribunal, in the case of AG Enterprises Vs. Commissioners of Customs, Jamnagar 2014 (308) ELT 18 (Tri.Ahmd). So, upon consent of both the parties, we take up the hearing of the appeals. We direct that the other appeals on identical issues as mentioned by the Learned Advocate would be treated in the day....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al in the case of AG Enterprises(Supra) in favour of the importer, and therefore there is no need to discuss the submission of the learned counsel on other issues. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the case, we reproduce below the relevant portion in the case of AG Enterprises (Supra). "4.Heard both sides and perused the case records. The? issue involved in all these appeals is as to what should be the classification of HSD/LDO, under the EXIM Policy, which is contained in the fuel tanks of the vessels brought for breaking. As per the CBEC Circular dated 26-1-2013 and the orders passed by Commissioner (Appeals) such fuel needs classification under 27101040 of the Import Policy and is a restricted item to be imported through State ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... brought for breaking up is classifiable under 89.08 along with the main vessel. In this regard, Paras 18 & 19 of case law Cine Land v. CC, Chennai (supra), relied upon by the appellants, following has been held by CESTAT, Chennai :- We find that the appellants had applied to the DGFT, New Delhi for a Merely because the reply was signed by the JDGFT, its validity cannot be discarded. The JDGFT is a Senior Officer in the office of the DGFT. The reply is from the DGFT as per the letter-head. Therefore, obviously the JDGFT has issued it acting in the office of DGFT as per their internal procedures. There are thousands of importers and exporters who apply for such clarifications to the DGFT. It sounds to reason that it would be physically imp....