epresentations have been received seeking clarifications, whether these imports are permitted through specified ports, whether the grade of Silk is to be verified before clearance by nominated agencies and whether Silk other than Mulberry Silk is also allowed to be imported against surrender of SIL.
It is directed to invite your attention to Board’s Circular No. 76/99-Customs, dated 17.11.99, on the above subject and to say that a doubt has beenraised with regard to debiting of bond in case of fresh import or local procurement of raw materials/capital goods. The doubt is in the context of sub-clause (v) of paragraph 6 of the above said Circular wherein it has been mentioned that the duty for
Circular No. 533/29/2000-CX Kindly find enclosed a copy of CEGAT final order No. 1222/99A dated 24.8.99 in case of M/s Escorts (JCB) Ltd. which has given a new dimension to the term “place of removal” used in Sec. 4 of Central Excise Act and point of time when the goods can be said to have been sold, which is in favour of revenue.
Circular No. 532/28/2000-CX Instances have come to the notice of the Board where it has been noticed that cases are not being investigated carefully and all relevant facts relating to the case are not being incorporated in SCNs and the adjudication orders. As a result when the issue is agitated before the CEGAT either by the party or the Department, CEGAT gives benefit of doubt to the party since DR is not in a position to explain finer issues/facts of the case.
Circular No. 531/27/2000-CX It is directed to refer to the Board’s Circular No. 459/25/99-CX dated 8.6.99 whereby the “Proforma of Declaration” under rule 173C relating to commodities notified under section 4A has been specified. Your attention is drawn to Note (2) in the Said Proforma (which was based on erstwhile Explanation 2 to section 4A) wherein it is mentioned that in case of different retail sale price for different regions/States,
It has been observed in Chennai Customs House that certain parties had faraudulently obtained payment of drawback by fabrication of export documents, wherein in the exporters were effected by certain exporters and the documents were fabricated in the name of a third party, who ultimately obtained payment of drawback. Some of the relevant drawback claims had been returned to the exporters
WHEREAS in the matter of import of Sodium Nitrite falling under sub-heading No. 2834.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), originating in, or exported from, People”s Republic of China, the Designated Authority vide its preliminary findings, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I, Section 1, dated the 6th April, 2000.
WHEREAS in the matter of import of Phthaiic Anhydride, falling under sub-heading No. 2917.35 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), originating in, or exported from, Indonesia, the Designated Authority vide its preliminary findings, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I, Section 1, dated the 31st March, 2000.
In the recent past, Board has received a number of references from the field formations seeking clarification on applicability of graduation condition for Regulation 9(1) examination prescribed in CHALR’84.
The principal notification 10/95-Centrat Excise, dated the 23rd February, 1995 was issued on 23″1 February 1995, vide G.S.R. 87(E), dated 23-2-95, and was last amended by notification number 2/2000-Central Excise, dated the 28th January, 2000, issued vide G S.R.73(E), dated 28th January, 2000.
