COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE Vs. BPL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the Revenue. The department has come in appeal on the ground that the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the partys letter dated 11 -1 -1996 on which the Assistant Commissioner had permitted the re -export, in allowing the refund claim.

(2.) SHRI Narashima Murthy, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue while reiterating the ground of the appeal submitted that the letter dated 11 -1 -1996 relates to permission to re -export the goods but details were not forthcoming in the said letter. Furthermore the documents referred to by the Commissioner (Appeals) in Para 2 were not considered by the Commissioner (Appeals) since he has not given any finding with reference to such documents.

(3.) ON the other hand, Shri Raghu, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants drew my attention to finding portion of order of the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein he has observed that the documents produced, in particular the letter dated 11 -1 -1996, on which the same Assistant Commissioner has permitted the re -export on the strength of the verification report of Customs officer clearly indicate that this is a case of erroneous payment of duty in advance in respect of goods which were wrongly shipped, which were in turn re -exported.