TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (7) TMI 428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....94. The goods were examined on first check and it was verified that the goods are of Indian origin re-imported within the time limit as stipulated in Section 20 but the identity of the goods with respect to export documents could not be established for want of original export packing, export marks and nos., item wise P/L. M/S. Popatlal Jetshi and Co. Clearing Agents for M/s. Indian Craft vide their letter dated 21-11-1994 requested for re-examination of the cargo. The goods were re-examined and it was found that the goods were not re-imported in their original export packing and that the identity of the goods is established on the basis of description and quantity declared and tag markings found with respect to export documents. Appellant c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of facts bringing out the difference in the facts of the case in respect of M/s. Ballarpur Industries and M/s. India Crafts. The appellant stated that the export obligation was fully discharged before getting the advance licence. It was also made transferable and no export bond was exectuted at any point of time by the appellant. No raw material was also imported and used in the manufacture of the final product and the final product was clearly non-dutiable as per the Central Excise Tariff Heading 6201.00. It was also pointed out that no AR 4 form was submitted and no claim for MODVAT was taken. On the other hand, the appellant pointed out that in the case referred to in the impugned order namely that of M/s. Ballarpur Industries, the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng authorities that payment of their two shipments against Shipping Bills Nos. 4960 and 4961 had not been received by them so far. They were therefore excluding these shipments from claiming under advance licence and requested issue of licences with transferability conditions by reducing the quantity and value proportionately. It was also pointed out that the order of confication was totally unwarranted as per para 3(1)(d). The appellant pointed out that on submission of the papers and documents before the licensing authorities, the licensing authorities made the licence transferable in terms of para 127/1 of the Handbook 1992-97. The total CIF value was also reduced to read ₹ 46.60,733/-. The appellant further submitted that on the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the DEEC books in respect of this consignment. The impugned order does not controvert any of these submissions of the appellant. Thereafter, the impugned order proceeds to consider whether export in bond would mean goods exported in bond under the Customs Act [or] under the Central Excise Act. I do not understand how the lower authority, can, after accepting the fact that no bond was submitted by the appellant at the time of export, proceed to a discussion on execution of the bond. The lower authority has also referred to an Order in Appeal passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) in regard to this issue which is grossly irrelevant as no bond has been executed by the appellant. I hold that it is on the basis of a misconception and tot....