9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (4) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present appeal is against the Order of the Additional Commissioner of Customs for Export, Custom House, Calcutta imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh on the appellant company, M/s. T.I.S.C.O. under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Briefly stated about the facts of the case are that the appellants were actually carrying out the activity of export and accordingly, had decided to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uality of the goods in question, were noticed by the Officials. The goods were not found to be of the same specification as was declared by the appellant company herein. In the circumstances, the appellants had requested to the Department for allowing them to cancel the Shipping Bill and to withdraw the consignment which was allowed for export by the Officials. 2. Proceedings were initiated on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alf of the appellant company, Dr. Samir Chakraborty, learned Advocate submitted that the appellant company admitted that there had been discrepancies in respect of number of goods and specifications of the same. He, however, admitted that the same was not on account of the mala fide intention on the part of the appellant company as the goods were manufactured by their Conversion Agent and certifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely offered to withdraw the export, which was also allowed to them by the authorities below. In the circumstances, he prayed that the quantum of penalty being much on the higher side, it needs to be interfered with by the Tribunal. 4. Appearing on behalf of the respondent Commissioner, Shri R.K. Roy, learned J.D.R. reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority and submitted that the pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
