2017 (10) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eals are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts in appeal No.C/300/2008 are taken. 2. The appellant had imported consignment of crude palm oil in bulk from Indonesia and warehoused the same under the cover of Bills of Entry No.135207 dt. 21/11/2003, No.137666 dt. 16/01/2004 and No.139826 dt. 11/03/2004 and claimed the assessment under CTH 1511000 and the benefit of Notification No.21/2002 and further tariff value in terms of Notification No.36/2001 was applied. The goods were provisionally assessed and cleared pending availability of test results for ascertaining the nature and composition of the imported goods. When the test results were obtained, the appellants were informed that the carotenoid c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re, there was a possibility of carotenoid level of a sample reducing over a period of time. True copies of these certificates have also been annexed with the appeals. After following due process of law, the Deputy Commissioner rejected the contention of the appellants and confirmed the demand of differential duty. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants filed appeals before the Commissioner(Appeals) who vide impugned orders rejected the same. Hence the present appeals. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law as the same have been passed without considering the facts and the law on the point. He further submitted that authorities below did not consider the fact that crude pal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that the beta carotenoid content was below the minmum prescribed for availing the benefit of the Notification No.21/2002 and therefore the appellants have been rightly denied the benefit of Notification and rightly classified the goods under CTH 15119090 on the basis of the test results. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties, we find that the test on the samples taken were conducted after more than 10 days of the drawing of the samples and further we do not have the evidence to the fact that the sample of the goods were stored in ideal condition. We also find on the basis of various scientific data that the beta carotenoid content in crude pal....