2004 (10) TMI 205

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....scertaining whether the goods attracted anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 106/2003, dated 10-7-2003 which prescribed anti-dumping duty on 'Mulberry Raw Silk' of grade '2A' imported from China. The CSTRI report showed that the subject goods were of grade 'B' as against the declared grade '4A'. 'Mulberry Raw Silk' of grade 'B' was chargeable to anti-dumping duty under the above Notification. The importer subsequently requested for re-testing fresh samples of the goods. However, later, they withdrew this request and applied for permission of the department to return the consignment to the Chinese supplier. This request for re-export was contained in their letter dated 1-8-2003 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (copy availa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (Mumbai), who are said to be indenting agents. This letter seems to throw much light on the bona fides of the importer's plea against the allegation of misdeclaration, and the same reads as under :- "With reference to the above, we have pleasure in placing our order for import of 900 Kgs. of mulberry raw silk, 27/29 Dur., 4A Gr. for our main unit as under : 1. Commodity : Mulberry Raw Silk 27/29 Dur., Cathaya Brand, 4A Grade with CIQ Certificate 2. Quantity : 900 Kgs. 3. Despatch : On or before 15th May 2003 4. Rate : US $ 14.20 per kg. CIF, Chennai 5. Payment : On DP basis as usual 6. Bankers : The documents are to be sent to our bankers : Indian Overseas Bank, No.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the grade of the imported silk was shown, in a subsequent test report, to be different from what was declared in the Bill of Entry would not per se lead to the inference of misdeclaration. The circumstances of the case do not admit of misdeclaration. Consequently, the imported goods did not offend any of the provisions of Section 111 of the Customs Act, to be confiscated. The order of confiscation is therefore set aside. The penalty imposed on the party under Section 112(a) of the Act is integrally related to confiscation. Where the goods are not liable to confiscation under Section 111, the importer thereof is not liable to any penalty under Section 112. Accordingly, the penalty is also set aside. Appeal No. C/99/2004 stands allowed. ....