2018 (5) TMI 72

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entative Per: Dr. D. M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. These appeals are filed against OIO No. 01/Commissioner/2011 dated 4.2.2011 passed by Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellant assessee had imported "6500 MTs of Coking Coal in Bulk" and filed Bills of Entry on 14.9.2010 claiming exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 (S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eclared that the imported goods was coking coal and the parameters in the same test report satisfied the conditions of the exemption Notification. When the sample was tested by the Customs department, all the parameters found to be different. Since there was mis-match in Load Port report and Chemical Examiner's report, they have requested re-testing of the same on 28.12.2010 and thereafter on thre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stated in the first report; also all the other parameters were not indicated in the second report. 6. Heard both sides and perused the records. 7. We find force in the argument of the learned Advocate. On going through the chemical test reports at the Load Port, and the Chemical test report of the department, we find that the parameters do not match. Once there are contradictions on the test rep....