ORDER
Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President
1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants herein imported a consignment of ‘Medical disposal goods’ on re-import vide Bill of Entry dated 6-12-1999. The consignment was assessed at concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 158/95-Cus., dated 14-11-1995 and clearance was allowed in terms of the Notification on execution of a bond undertaking to re-export the same within six months. The Asstt. Commissioner of Customs ordered enforcement of the bond on failure to re-export the goods within the stipulated period of six months. The Adjudication order was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence this appeal by the importer.
2. The reliance placed by the ld. Counsel for the appellants on CBEC Circular No. 14/97, dated 3-6-97 clarifying that the time period of six months under the Notification, for the purpose of re-export, is to be calculated from the date of actual clearance of the goods and not from the date of filing of the B/E, is misplaced as in the present case the date of clearance by the Customs authorities, that is, the date on which out of charge order was given by the Customs authorities, was 26-9-2000, and therefore, the goods ought to have been re-exported prior to 29-11-2000. However, the actual re-export took place only in Feb-March, 2001. The plea of the appellants that the six months period is to be calculated from the date on which they took possession of the goods from the Customs authorities viz. 26-9-2000 is not the correct interpretation of the circular which obviously was meant to take care of any possible delay on the part of the Customs authorities between the assessment of the B/E and the date of passing of out of charge order, as seen from the language of the circular. We see no infirmity in the impugned order and accordingly uphold the same and reject the appeal.