9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. [Order per : Justice K. Sreedharan, President]. One Mr. Nani Erach Chesson imported an Audi Car to India on 7-12-1988. It was valued at Rs. 1,50,777.00. Accessories fixed to the car were valued at Rs. 39,396.00. On the total amount of Rs. 1,90,173.00, duty was calculated and the importer was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,44,843.00. On payment of that amount, Customs authorities cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ona fide purchaser for value without notice of any defect in the title of the transferor. Madras High Court, after hearing Counsel representing the Union of India, disposed of the appeal by judgment dated 20-2-1990. That decision is reported as A. Rathnam v. Union of India, 1996 (83) E.L.T. 40. While deciding the case, Madras High Court observed that the remedy of the department in a case of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine of Rs. 1 lakh was fixed. On the ground that the appellant is not responsible for misdeclaration and undervaluation, no personal penalty was imposed on him. This order is under challenge. 2. The main argument advanced by the learned Counsel representing the appellant is that the impugned order passed by the Collector was one in violation of direction given by the High Court of Madras. As per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the High Court directed release of the vehicle to the appellant subject to the order that may be passed by the appellate authority in an appeal against the order of assessment passed at the time of release of the vehicle. No appeal having been filed by the department, the order of assessment passed by the customs officer at the time of clearance of the vehicle on 7-12-1988, stands unvaried. Since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
