2017 (6) TMI 882

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....resent appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 30.10.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (A) whereby the Commissioner rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are appellant had imported 1483.05 kgs of raw silk and cleared the same under Into-Bond Bill of Entry and warehoused the goods. Subsequently, the sa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re the Commissioner, who rejected the appeal of the appellant and hence this appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. None has appeared on behalf of the appellant and on the other hand, learned AR Shri K. T. Pakshirajan has appeared on behalf of the Revenue. 5. Since none has appeared on behalf of the appellant and it is an old case of 2008, I proceed to decide the sa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e value of the imported goods from Rs. 600/- to Rs. 879.85. 7. On the other hand, the learned A.R. strongly defended the impugned order and submitted that in the present case, the appellants have not challenged the assessment order and consequently, they are not entitled to the refund. In support of his submission, he relied upon the Apex Court decisions in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd....