9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (10) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n report dated 11-10-1994 on the back of the bill of entry shows the gross weight and net weight as also tare weight of the total consignment. The officer has recorded tare weight of one bag as 8.5 kgs. The weighment indicated chat the total Hing imported stood at 6766 kgs. The CHA accepted the excess receipt vide their letter dated 12-11-1994. (This letter was not produced in evidence). Importers waived the notice to show cause. The Additional Commissioner heard the importers, confiscated the excess goods and prescribed redemption, fine and penalty. On payment of duty, fine and penalty, the goods were cleared on 25-11-1994. The adjudication order dated 28-3-1995 was then issued in which the Additional Commissioner held that excess import o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... servations she upheld the lower order but at the same time reducing the fine to Rs. 75,000/- and the quantum of penalty to Rs. 25,000/-. Against this order, the present appeal has been filed. 3. Shri H.S. Mew, ld. Advocate reiterated the pleas on the tare weight actually having been higher than what was shown. He submitted that the receipt had shown the correct weight that was 6109 kgs. which was not appreciated by the Customs. As an alternate plea, he submitted that the refer ences to the 5 per cent excess in the lower orders reflected that the excess upto 5 per cent was condoned by the department. It is his plea that the excess should be held to be only that quantity which exceeded the condonable limit. He, further, stated that the Addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2-11-1994 of M/s. Quick Carrier given to the department. As the goods had already been cleared, therefore, re-weighment of consignment was not feasible." 8. What the proceedings show is that the agitation made before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the aspect of calculation of tare weight was not followed up by the present appellants thereafter in the adjudication proceed ings de novo. However, the same issue was again raised before the Commis sioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of the plea as per the narration made above. 9. The fact remains that the finding of the tare weight was not contested by the importers when the goods were physically weighed. The Commissioner is right in saying that at this stage it is not poss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
