2003 (6) TMI 159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ament (in stock lot) and 100 per cent polyester warp knit fabric (in stock lot). Appellants filed a Bill of Entry dated 6-4-2000 and claimed classification of 100 per cent polyester fabric of non-texturised filament (in stock lot) under heading 5407.61 of Customs Tariff and 100 per cent polyester warp knit fabric (in stock lot) under Heading 6002.43 of Customs Tariff. The examination of the consignment could not be carried out due to mis-handling of the cargo by Air India. The consignment was handed over to M/s. Air India at Dubai for carriage from Dubai to Delhi. Out of 60 packages, 29 packages were brought directly from Dubai to Delhi by M/s. Air India and remaining 31 packages were brought by M/s. Air India from Dubai to Mumbai and there....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 12 unmarked packages, cannot be made the basis for misdeclaration on the part of the appellants. Appellants also contended that they asked for re-test of the samples, but their request to re-test was declined on the ground that there was no valid reason for re-testing. 5. Ld. DR, appearing on behalf of the Revenue, submitted that as per the test report, there was clear misdeclaration by the appellants. 6. In this case, we find that the appellants made import of the goods in 60 packages. The consignment was mis-handled by M/s. Air India. This fact is not disputed by the Revenue. Out of this consignment 12 packages were unmarked and the appellants are not claiming those packages. The adjudicating authority also held that 12 unmarked pa....