2017 (3) TMI 1431

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tals India Pvt. Ltd." has been represented by Shri S. Vasudevan, ld. Advocate. 3. Revenue's main submissions are that:  (i) The Commissioner (Appeals)' order holding that the goods imported by the respondent were certified to be as Alloy Steel Melting at pre-shipment stage as per certificate of M/s Worldwide Logistics, Survey and Inspection (WLSI) authorised by DGFT and the said certificate has been issued after inspection of goods and the Revenue has not examined the said report which is vital in this case does not seem to be correct as the prime scope of the pre-shipment inspecting agency at the port of export appears to be for a limited purpose of certification to the effect that the consignment does not contain any type of ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (iii) Proceedings initiated against the respondent by Show Cause Notice were illegal as there was no charge made out against them. (iv) The respondent cannot be penalised as imported goods were not liable to confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. The respondents were under bona fide belief that the imported goods consisted of 'Alloy Steel Scraps' as intended to be imported by them and they accordingly filed bills of entry. 5. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions of both the sides. The Revenue's main arguments are that the DGFT authorised agency who issued certificate at pre-shipment stage was not authorised to issue certificate on the status of the goods i.e. "if the same were in the ca....