2024 (1) TMI 258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rted 10218.477 MTs of deformed Steel Bars Grade HRB 500 (TMT Bars) under CTH 7213 1090, claiming exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 01.03.2002 vide Sl. No. 190C for exemption from Basic Customs Duty (BCD) and Sl. No. 202A for exemption from Counter-vailing Duty (CVD). 2.2 Entertaining a doubt as to whether the impugned goods were alloy steels or non-alloy steels and prime or secondary, the Revenue drew samples and sent the same to National Metallurgical Laboratory (NML), Chennai. Thereafter, basing on the letter dated 30.06.2008 filed by the importer, the Bill-of-Entry was assessed provisionally pending the outcome of the test result, with BCD at the rate of 5% and nil rate of CVD. Accordingly, the importer had paid the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f BCD at the rate of 5% in terms of Sl. No. 207. The original authority has however held that both alloy and non-alloy TMT bars were eligible for Nil rate of CVD in terms of Sl. No. 202A of the said Notification. 7. Aggrieved by the above, the importer preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai, who vide Order-in-Appeal C.Cus. No. 395/2014 dated 10.03.2014 has rejected their appeal and it is against this order that the present appeal has been filed before this forum. 8. Heard Smt. S. Yogalakshmi, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri N. Satyanarayanan, Ld. Assistant Commissioner for the Revenue. 9. After hearing both sides, we find that the only issue to be decided by us is: whether the appellant is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hout any basis, observed that the average silicon content was more than 0.6%; if the average silicon content is considered, then the same would be 0.58% in respect of 20mm TMT rods, which is much below the standard requirement. 11. Per contra, the Ld. Assistant Commissioner supported the findings of the lower authorities. 12. We have considered the rival contentions and we have carefully gone through the documents placed on record. 13. This is a case where apparently the demand has been raised by the Revenue by re-classifying the TMT bars under CTH 72279090, which action is not at all supported by any evidence. Thus, the very demand appears to be only on assumptions and presumptions of the adjudicating authority. 14.1 It was the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ical Laboratory, since the re-classification has been attempted holding that these 20mm, 25mm and 32mm TMT bars are alloys, after entertaining a fundamental doubt at paragraph 16 of the Order-in-Original, in the following words: - "16. For the remaining 32 MM TMT bars, there was no NML Report (or) no evidence to prove it was non-alloy steel bar as per available records. I find it could not be possible to ascertain whether these 32 MM TMT bars are alloy (or) non alloy steel to extend the notification benefit. In the absence of any evidence to prove that the imported goods of 32 MM TMT bar are non-alloy steel, the exemption benefit claimed for BCD vide Sl. No. 190C is rejected." 15.1 In the order, however, the original authority h....