1999 (12) TMI 509

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ection 112 imposed. On receipt of the notice, the appellant submitted detailed objections, inter alia, contending that the stores received from the rigs were kept in Nhava base, that they were moved to the mainland for effecting repairs and that they were received back at Nhava base and thereafter sent to the rigs for use in the rigs. Such stores were not liable to duty under the Customs Act. They also disputed the action of the department in imposing duty and about the value of the scrap sold by them. 2. After considering the objection raised by the appellant, Commissioner of Customs by order-in-original No. 59/97 dated 15-10-97 imposed a penalty of Rs. 12,50,000/- under Section 112(a) and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on ONGC under Section 11 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s which are taken out for repair to the mainland comes back to the same base, no duty can be imposed on them. This fact is virtually conceded by the Commissioner in the impugned order wherein he observes, I observe that whenever evidence has been tendered to the effect the repair goods were taken back to the rigs, the department has given the benefit to the notices. This observation was not given its full merit while passing the impugned order. If the goods which were taken out of Nhava base came back to the base, duty liability will stand cancelled. It was not necessary to see whether such goods were sent to rigs for use or not. 6. It is the practice of the appellant to bring the stores from rig to Nhava base. Goods in the Nhava base a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n cast by the impugned order are in relation to those which were received back at Nhava base. This action on the part of the adjudicating authority is clearly erroneous. We set aside that part of the order imposing duty on those stores which were in fact received back in Nhava base as ascertained on the endorsements of CISF personnel. Adjudicating authority is directed to reassess the stores which have not been returned to Nhava base in the manner indicated above and to impose duty on those stores in accordance with law. We make it clear that while imposing the penalty, the appellant should be given reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter. 7. The second contention raised by the ld. Counsel was in relation to the duty imposed o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X