TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1138
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....04.2021 from M/s.Bril Inc., US under House Bill of Lading dated 13.05.2021 with a total declared assessable value of Rs.7,13,872/-. The goods were lying at M/s.Chandra CFS. According to the appellant, goods imported vide said Bill of Entry dated 11.06.2021 are reimport goods which were actually exported to US vide Shipping Bill dt. 27.05.2019. 2. The goods were subjected to examination and it was reported that imported kids bikes did not have model number marking. Out of 183 nos. of kids bikes, there were only 157 nos. of packing boxes with sticker containing model number. The remaining 26 nos. of kids bikes did not bear any model number or marking on the packing boxes. The department was of the view that identify of 26 kids bikes was no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out by the appellants that by mistake the CHA had wrongly classified the goods under CTH 9503. On 22.07.2021, the re-imported goods were once again forwarded to the officers at Chandra CFS for examination. On such second examination, the officers reported that out of 183 kids bikes only 157 kids bikes had the marking "R01" on the cartons. On 09.08.2021, appellants filed representation to the officers of Customs informing that merely because the marking "R01" is not found on the remaining packages (26 Nos.), it cannot be said that identify of the re-imported goods is not established. 4. Without considering the arguments of the appellant, the adjudicating authority passed the order by which he ordered confiscation of the entire goods with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a reason to deny that the goods belonged to the brand name when all the other 157 packages are admitted to be of the said brand. 6. It is argued by the Ld. Counsel that the authorities below have imposed redemption fine for re-export of the goods. He prayed that the confiscation may be set aside and the goods be allowed for home consumption and also grant waiver of demurrage charges. 7. Ld. A.R Shri S. Balakumar appeared and argued for the Department. He adverted to para-6 of the Order-in-Original which reads as under : "6. I find that, the Bill of Entry No.4281619 dated 11.06.2021 was 100% examined in the presence of the CHA, by the Shed Officers posted at M/s.Chandra CFS on 25.06.2021.A total of 5 (Five) package covering a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her product as notified by the Central Government from time to time to conform to BIS standards. Vide notification dated 15.09.2020, the same was made effective from 01.01.2021. Further, General Notes regarding Import Policy in Para 2 (Indian Quality Standards) in sub para A, it is stated that goods should comply with BIS standards. 8. For re-import of goods, the identity of goods that they are goods which were originally exported has to be established. In the present case, there was no marking "R01" on 26 packages and therefore their identity was not established. The order of confiscation and direction to re-import by paying redemption fine is legal and proper. He prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 9. Heard both sides. 10. F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds bikes does not require interference. From the records, it is seen that the goods were subjected to quality assurance test by National Accreditation Board for Testing & Calibration Laboratory (NABL). This report is dated 30.05.2018. It can be presumed that before the original export to USA, the goods were subjected to test for quality and standards. It is affirmed by the department that the reimported 157 bikes belong to the lot that was originally exported. Therefore, it has to be construed that the appellant has complied with requirement of BIS standard (brand name) as well as identity of 157 nos. of bikes. We hold that the order of confiscation and re-export in respect of 157 bikes requires to be set aside which we hereby do. 13. Th....