2007 (12) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (T)]. -1.  Heard both sides. 2. Shri J.P. Khaitan, ld. Sr. Advocate appearing for the Appellants states that the Appellants initially exported 5000 pieces of impugned goods in August, 2002 but part of the consignment was returned by the buyers as the zinc coating was defective. At the time of re-importation, the Appellants claimed benefit of Notification No. 158/95-Cus and a doubt was rai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r any other benefit was taken in respect of 5000 pieces exported but in respect of the subsequent re-exported 2250 pieces, the DEPB benefit was claimed and such consignment has been examined by the Customs under the DEPB scheme and the description of the goods as verified by the Customs Authorities tallies with the description of the imported items. He further states that in subsequent occasions t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....45) E.L.T. 575. (ii) Dhanalaxmi Controls & Equipments v. Commissioner of Customs; Cochin - 2007 (213) E.L.T. 284. 4.  Heard the ld. DR who supports the impugned orders and states that the Notification 158/95-CUS requires AC's satisfaction and since the AC was not satisfied in this case regarding the identity of the goods, the impugned order does not require modification as the AC's sati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me to the same conclusion regarding identity of the goods as they had come to at the time of initial import. Moreover, since the 2250 pieces have been exported under the DEPB scheme, it can be safely presumed, that at least description of the goods in question have been properly examined and on that basis it is possible to conclude that the Appellants have satisfied the condition under Notificatio....