9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (12) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Calcutta-23, being aggrieved from Order No. Cal-Cus-3213/82, dated 11-11-1982 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Calcutta, filed an appeal before this Tribunal. The said appeal was presented in the Registry on the 21st day of February, 1983 in the form of letter and was not on proper form. The Registry had intimated the defect to the appellant vide Letter No. CD(T)Cal- 40/83, dated 26th March, 198 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1962 and personal penalty of Rs. 250/- was also levied on the appellant. 3. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order, the appellant had filed the appeal before the Collector (Appeals) who had upheld the order of confiscation of the goods in the inventory list at Sl. Nos. 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 17, 19, 20 and 32. The remaining goods were revalued at Rs. 1,382/- and allowed to be cleared according ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was out of station and as such the defects could not be removed earlier. He has pleaded that since the original appeal in the form of letter was in time the submission of appeal was also in time. If at all there is any delay the same may kindly be condoned. On merits, the learned Advocate has argued that the goods brought by the appellant are for the use of the appellant s family and are also for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was Rs. 1,000/- which has been duly allowed by the Asstt. Collector. The goods brought by the appellant are much more and are of commercial nature and as such the appellant is not entitled to get the same released and had pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. 6. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts and circumstances of the case, I uphold the findings of the Collector (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
