Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Fairways Trading Co vs Cc, Amritsar on 8 April, 2010
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELHI
COURT NO. II
Custom Appeal No. 603 of 2006-Cus.
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 171/CUS/JAL/2006 dated 28.4.06 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Customs, Jalandhar)
M/s Fairways Trading Co. Appellant
Vs.
CC, Amritsar Respondent
Date of Hearing: 8.4.2010 Appearance :
Appeared for Appellant - None
Appeared for Respondent - Shri S. Chand, DR
CORAM: HONBLE MR. D.N. PANDA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HONBLE MR. S.K. GAULE, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Order No.dated.
Per D.N. Panda:
The Appellant is absent today despite notice. Therefore we took assistance of Revenue to decide this Appeal. Ld. DR Shri S. Chand appearing on behalf of Revenue submits that when the Adjudication dropped demand, that was thoroughly examined by ld. Commissioner (Appeals) and there was reversal of Adjudication done. He supported the Appellate order stating that Bill of Entry and the invoices having been examined, the goods were proved to be different and that is also different from the goods notified for exemption under Notification No. 76/2003-Cus dated 13.5.03. Even certificate of origin was established against the appellant. Therefore there should be no interference to the Appellate order.
2. Heard Revenue.
3. We should have certainly come to rescue of Revenue to support the Appellate order passed. But we do not find any evidence to show how the first examination has failed to detect the goods to be of different nature from the nature as held by the ld. First Appellate Authority. Consequent upon examination of the goods with Bill of Entry, the goods were cleared. To find out whether there was any pilferage of Revenue, we enquired about the notice was issued duly. It is established from record that notice whether was issued duly because the date of Bill of Entry was 12.2.04 and show-cause notice was issued on 24.6.04. But we are not able to appreciate the basis of the allegation in absence of Bill of Entry and without appropriate technical opinion about the nature of the goods. In absence of such documents, the nature of the goods found in first examination report cannot be held to be different to support the order of the ld. First Appellate Authority. Therefore we restore the order-in-original and allow the appeal setting aside the first appellate order.
(Dictated & pronounced in open Court) (D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (S.K. GAULE) TECHNICAL MEMBER RM