2017 (12) TMI 339

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Non Alloys). The main issues in the present appeal is "whether (i) the goods i.e. HMS Scrap as mentioned in the Bill of Entry was mis-declared and liable to be confiscated (ii) The other goods i.e. Steel Slabs were used for concealing the so called offending goods (iii) there was mis-declaration with regard to value of the good (imported goods) (iv) there was mis-declaration with regard to the weight of the goods, which was allegedly shown as less than the actual weight." 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the relevant invoices of the foreign supplier as well as the pre-shipment inspection certificate described the impugned goods as HMS and so do the high sea sale contract and the bill of lading. She noted that the respondent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6) ELT 722 (Tri.-Del.). They also cited the judgement in the case of Midwest Granite Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE Hyderabad-I - 2009 (233) ELT 133 (Tri.-Bang) and Shriram Metals & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC. Chennai - 2006 (200) ELT 274 (Tr.-Chennai), to support their contention that enhancement of value had no legal basis. 6. We have considered the submissions of both sides. We find that the original adjudicating authority held the goods to be re-rollable scrap based only on the opinion of custom authorities who examined the goods. No expert opinion was obtained. As against that, the Commissioner (Appeals) has based her findings on several documentary evidences as mentioned earlier, including the pre-shipment inspection certificate which clearly certif....