9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (10) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, which was filed along with the appeal on 22-7-1992, seeking dispensation of the pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 7,000 has not been listed as apparently the Registry has failed to take note of the same. Since it is on account of the fault of the Registry and the issue also falls in short compass, I dispense with the pre-deposit of penalty and take up the appeal itself for disposal, afresh. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en given to him by his relatives as gifts. He submitted that the appellant is running a lorry transport service and has all the necessity for use of the goods and taking into account the amount of duty liability and redemption fine he is not able to clear the goods. He further pleaded that in the alternative, if the goods cannot be released, the same may be allowed for re-export and prayed for red ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iscation and the amount of penalty is also not excessive. 5. I have carefully considered the pleas of both the sides. I observe, the appellant is not contesting the confiscability of the goods and the plea is only for allowing re-export of the confiscated goods. I observe the learned lower authority has given the following reasons for not permitting re-export : The passenger is an Indian pass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her goods were found in his baggage. In view of the above it cannot be accepted that the appellant was under a bona fide impression that the goods could be brought and cleared free of duty and in fact, I find, the appellant has tried to clear the goods without giving the details in the declaration given to the authorities. I observe that in the facts and circumstances of the case the confiscation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
