2018 (3) TMI 1445

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... behalf of Revenue in this appeal would urge that the substantial questions of law, as proposed by Revenue at pages 5 and 6 of the paper book, squarely arise from the order of Tribunal. The contention of Mr. Kantharia is that the goods were liable for confiscation. The respondent-assessee is an importer. He filed a bill of entry dated 25th October 2015 for import of the goods stated to be not for human consumption, uncleaned and unsorted. The import was from a USA party. The assessee declared the assessment value of Rs. 15,76,480.84 under Heading No.23099039 of Customs Tariff Act. As the goods were declared not for human consumption, they were ordered for first check examination and the samples were forwarded to a laboratory. Intelligence w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed counsel for assessee, on the other hand, would submit that the issue was in respect of mis-declaration. The invoices from the supplier indicated that these are Pistachio Kernels Oil Stock Feed Grade for industrial use. The bill of entry was consistent with same description namely not for human consumption, uncleaned and unsorted. Thus, the assessee itself sought examination of the goods on the first check basis. The investigation report also indicates that samples of the goods were drawn by Appraising Officer and Revenue itself forwarded the goods/samples to the laboratory of their choice. The certificate of analysis of the samples drawn and sent by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, indicated that the consignment is an animal ....