Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2008 (10) TMI 186

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... indicates that they have claimed the benefit of concessional basic customs duty under Customs Notification No. 21/2002 dated 1-3-2002 (serial No. 368A) and also claimed the benefit of total exemption from CVD under Central Excise Notification No. 6/2002 dated 1-3-2002 (serial No. 269A). Classification claimed was under 90189099 and the description of the goods as furnished in the bill of entry was "Bio Logic Navigator Pro Brain Stem evoked response Audiometer with STD Accessories". The duty worked out as per check-list was for a sum of Rs.18,765/- including cess amount of Rs. 367.94. Bill of Entry has been assessed allowing exemption under Customs Notification No. 21 /2002, as claimed by the appellant, but the benefit of the Central Excise....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the benefit of Notification relating to CVD and the proper course would have been to file appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals). Having failed to do so, the claim is not admissible as held by the Larger Bench in the case of C.C. (Imp.), Nhava Sheva v. Eurotex Indus & Exports Ltd. - 2007 (216) E.L.T. 137 (Tri.-LB) which has followed the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector v. Flock (India) Ltd. - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.) and in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.). 6.1 We have carefully considered the submissions. The check-list indicates the claim of the appellant for the benefit of Notification for CVD, which stands denied in the assessment order. A close scrutiny of th....