SABARI EXIM PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants imported 441.6 MTs of non -alloy steel slabs and 879.16 MTs of non -alloy steel blooms and filed two Bills of Entry on 4 -12 -2002 for clearing the goods which were declared as composed of prime steel. On inspection, it appeared to the Customs that the goods were to be treated as 'seconds and defectives', which attracted a higher rate of duty and were not eligible for the Notification benefit claimed by the importer. The National Metallurgical Laboratory (in short "NML") examined samples of the goods and opined that the goods had to be treated as 'seconds'. The NML report was contested by the party. Nevertheless, show cause notices were issued to them alleging misdeclaration of the goods and proposing confiscation, penalty etc. In the course of adjudication of the notices, the party requested for re -export of the goods. This request was acceded to and, accordingly, the Commissioner allowed re -export against payment of penalties of Rs. 6 lakhs and Rs. 3 lakhs under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act as per Orders -in -Original Nos. 403 -404/2003 dated 3 -4 -2003. These orders of the Commissioner were appealed against and this Tribunal, by Final Order Nos. 614 -615/2003, dated 25 -7 -2003 [2003 (157) E.L.T. 352 (Tri.)] remanded the case to the Commissioner for de novo adjudication, with the following directions :

(2.) IT appears from the records that, though originally the Commissioner had acceded to the importer's request for re -export of the goods, the party could not re -export the goods on account of the fact that, by that time, the foreign supplier had backed out and refused to accept the goods. Apparently, it was in such circumstances that the, party preferred an appeal to this Tribunal and obtained the remand order.

(3.) LD . JCDR reiterated the observations and findings of the Commissioner as recorded in the impugned order.