At, Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
By, THE HONOURABLE MS. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM
By, VICE PRESIDENT & THE HONOURABLE DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY
By, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Shri C. Rangaraju, SDR for the Appellant. Shri Hari Radhakrishnan, Advocate for the Respondents.
Per Jyoti Balasundaram
1. The issue in dispute in this appeal is whether benefit of concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 20/99-Cus. dated 28.2.1999 as amended by Notification No. 139/99-Cus. dated 30.12.1999 is available to the assessees on import of crude sunflower seed oil. The benefit has been extended by the lower appellate authority in separate orders all of which are challenged by the Revenue in the present appeals on the ground that there is a shortage of oil in the quantities between the Bills of Entry and the actual quantity received and used in the refinery.
2. We have heard both sides. We find that the quantity as per shore tank receipt has been taken while the Revenue contends that the quantity in the ship ullage survey report is required to be adopted. The apex Court?s decision in NOCIL - 2002 (142) ELT A280 (SC) has been relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals). He has also relied upon CBEC?s Circular No.96/2002-Cus. dated 27.12.2002 to hold that it is the quantity received in the shore tank which is required to be accepted. In the light of the apex Court?s decision cited su
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
pra, there is no ground to interfere with the impugned orders which we accordingly uphold. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.