9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against Adjudication Order for customs duty, penalty, and confiscation of imported goods.
Summary: 1. Manufacture of life-saving drugs: Appellant imported goods for manufacturing life-saving drugs under Notification No. 23/98-Cus. They availed exemption but faced demand of duty as goods were not used in their factory. Argument made for manufacturing on loan license basis and jurisdiction of Customs Commissioner. 2. Jurisdiction and contravention of Rules: Appellant argued that the impugned order contravened 1996 Rules as manufacturing was not in their factory. Claimed that Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise should raise duty demand, not Customs Commissioner. Cited relevant legal provisions and case law. 3. Confiscation and penalty: Appellant contended that Section 111 of Customs Act cannot be invoked as goods were properly imported and used for intended purpose. Opposing, it was argued that goods were liable for confiscation and penalty due to non-fulfillment of conditions. 4. Decision: Tribunal found that goods were not used in the factory as per the Notification conditions, making them liable for confiscation and penalty. Show cause notice jurisdiction discussed, with ruling that Customs Authorities can demand duty and impose penalty. Confiscation order set aside, penalty reduced to Rs. 10,000. Appeal partly allowed.
|
