Commissioner of Customs (Acu) Vs. Modi Rubber Ltd. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. this is an application by revenue for staying the implementation of order-in-appeal no. 734/2001 dated 6.9.2001 in which the commissioner (appeals) has allowed the appeal filed by the respondent, m/s. modi rubber ltd. 2. shri r.d. negi, learned dr submitted that the respondents filed a bill of entry for clearance of a consignment of hydraulic power unit, ics and some other goods and claimed green channel facility; that the green channel facility was rejected and on examination, item no. 2 and 6 were found to be compact digital signal processor and demodulator box classifiable under heading 8537.10 and 8542.10 of the first schedule to the customs tariff act; that the goods were confiscated and ordered to be released on payment of redemption fine and penalty; that the commissioner (appeals) has wrongly allowed the appeal observing that the importer had claimed classification under heading 85.42 on the basis of supplier's invoice.3. on the other hand, shri b.l. narsimhan, learned advocate submitted that in the bill of entry, the description given by them was compact digital signal processor only and this fact has been duly noted by the commissioner (appeals) in the impugned order. he also mentioned that the goods have already been released by the customs department.4. we have considered the submissions of both sides. as the imported goods have already been released to the respondents and the finding of the commissioner that the goods were not misdeclared, has not been challenged in the grounds of appeal, the revenue has not made out a prima facie case for staying the operation of the implementation of the impugned order. accordingly, we reject the stay petition and post the matter for final hearing on 22.2.2002.

Judgment:
1. This is an application by Revenue for staying the implementation of Order-in-Appeal No. 734/2001 dated 6.9.2001 in which the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the Appeal filed by the respondent, M/s. Modi Rubber Ltd. 2. Shri R.D. Negi, learned DR submitted that the respondents filed a Bill of Entry for clearance of a consignment of Hydraulic Power Unit, Ics and some other goods and claimed green channel facility; that the green channel facility was rejected and on examination, Item No. 2 and 6 were found to be Compact Digital Signal Processor and Demodulator Box classifiable under Heading 8537.10 and 8542.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act; that the goods were confiscated and ordered to be released on payment of redemption fine and penalty; that the Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly allowed the appeal observing that the importer had claimed classification under Heading 85.42 on the basis of supplier's invoice.

3. On the other hand, Shri B.L. Narsimhan, learned Advocate submitted that in the Bill of Entry, the description given by them was Compact Digital Signal Processor only and this fact has been duly noted by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. He also mentioned that the goods have already been released by the Customs Department.

4. We have considered the submissions of both sides. As the imported goods have already been released to the respondents and the finding of the Commissioner that the goods were not misdeclared, has not been challenged in the grounds of appeal, the Revenue has not made out a prima facie case for staying the operation of the implementation of the impugned order. Accordingly, we reject the stay petition and post the matter for final hearing on 22.2.2002.