TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (7) TMI 120
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under proper declaration. The allegations against the respondent was that the goods exported under the export obligation were misdeclared inasmuch as the respondent had used the material of inferior grade to the one required in the manufacture of utensils. The Commissioner of Customs came to the conclusion that the charge against the respondent had been proved. The Commissioner for his conclusion relied upon the report of the Chemical Examiner. The demand of the respondent for retesting of samples was declined but in order to obviate any unfair treatment to the respondent, the Commissioner gave option to the respondent to cross-examine the Chemical Examiner who had tested the samples. The respondent, however, did not avail that option and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Further, a penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- was imposed on the respondent under Section 114 of the Act read with Section 11 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1962. 2.The Order of the Commissioner was challenged by the respondent by preferring appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order has set aside the order of the Commissioner of Customs. Under these circumstances, appeal under Section 130E of the Act has been filed by the Commissioner of Customs. 3.Shri Mohta, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent has raised objection about the maintainability of the appeal contending that since the present case does not involve determination of any question h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mples on the ground that there is no such provision in the Act and (2) Non-supply of the copy of the shipping bills. 5.Regarding the first reason, noticing the contention urged on behalf of the Revenue that there is no provision which permits retesting of samples, the Tribunal states that there is also no provision under the Customs Act which prohibits retesting of the samples, and accordingly holding that the denial of opportunity to retest the sample was violative of principles of natural justice. No specific provision has been brought to our notice which permits retesting of samples, but, for the present case, without going into that aspect, we would assume that there was no bar in granting opportunity to retest the samples. At the same....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e principles of natural justice is not sustainable. 6.The second reason given by the Tribunal is also unsustainable as the non-supply of copy of the shipping bills containing the examination report was of no consequence as admittedly the report of the test conducted on the samples drawn on the respective consignments establishing that the inferior material has been used had been supplied to the respondent. Under these circumstances the reasoning of the Commissioner of Customs could not be faulted. Therefore, the conclusion of the Tribunal that the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs was in violation of principles of natural justice is unsustainable. 7.The Tribunal also held that the demand in respect of consignments was time barre....