9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (5) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case in accordance with the practice followed by the Calcutta Customs in the matter of imposition of Redemption Fine. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the original Adjudicating Authority (i.e. Deputy Collector of Custom House, Calcutta) held that the five consignments of the goods (i.e. Colour Picture Tubes) in question, imported by the appellants are unauthorised and liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and allowed their redemption, on the appellants paying a redemption fine of Rs. 30,000.00 on each of the consignments. 3. The learned Collector of Customs, Custom House, Calcutta, authorised the learned Assistant Collector of Customs, Calcutta to file an appeal, under Section 129D(2) of Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... even otherwise the order is not a speaking order and it has not taken into consideration the grounds taken by the learned Deputy Collector while he imposed the redemption fine. 6. But the learned S.D.R., Shri M.N. Biswas contended that the order passed by the learned Deputy Collector was not sound and the legality and propriety was involved and therefore, the learned Collector of Customs applied his mind to the facts of the case and had correctly ordered for filing the appeal, by virtue of his powers, under Section 129D(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. Secondly, he contended that the learned Collector of Customs Central Excise (Appeals) has taken into consideration that the normal practice of the Custom House in such cases was to impose a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken up in appeal, by the learned Collector of Customs before the Collector of Customs (Appeals). In that order, he has given the point for determination of the appeal, as to how far the order of the adjudicating officer, allowing the redemption of five consignments of Colour Picture Tubes, imposing a nominal redemption fine, in the absence of valid Import Licence, is legal and proper. So, whether this order was proper was to be determined in the appeal and the propriety of the order in question was involved. Hence on that ground, it cannot be said that there is no compliance with Section 129D(2) and we are not able to accept this contention advanced on behalf of the appellants. 9. The second contention of the learned Consultant is that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th Section 3(2) of Import Export (Control) Act. 1947. Therefore, these grounds which were relied on by the learned Deputy Collector that such picture tubes were allowed clearance by the Custom House in the past which was the basis for imposing the redemption fine, was not at all considered by the learned Collector of Customs. He only considered that the normal practice was to impose a higher redemption fine. But for deviating from the normal practice the learned Deputy Collector has given a reasoning that there was a past practice of allowing such consignments. That was not dealt with by the learned Collector in the impugned order. In such circumstance, we are of the opinion that the learned Collector should decide the matter afresh in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
