9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. The authorities below have confiscated the second hand machines imported by the appellant on the ground that at the time of importation, the same required a valid import licence whereas the appellant had claimed the goods under OGL. Option has been given to the appellant to redeem the machines on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 80,000/-. Persona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submits that orders for import were negotiated, payments for the import were made and the goods in question handed over to their shipper M/s. F.T.I, on 24-3-1999 as per the bill of lading issued by the said M/s. F.T.I. However, M/s. F.T.I. further entrusted the goods to M/s. M.I.S.C. who issued another bill of lading on 12-4-1999. He submitted that the second bill of lading was only an arrangement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods were actually shipped on 12-4-1999. In this view he submits that the impugned orders are entitled to be upheld. He also places reliance on the Tribunal s decision in the case reported in Swati Growth Funds Ltd. - 1995 (79) E.L.T. 247 (Tribunal) = 1995 (59) ECR 511 (Tribunal) wherein it has been held that actual date of shipment is relevant for deciding as to whether a licence was required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has observed that the date shown on the bill of lading is the date on which the goods were entrusted by the suppliers to the agents of the carriers. On similar facts it has been held that date of actual shipment and loading of the goods on board the vessel is the date on which the transit of the goods commence from the country of origin and the relevant date is the shipped bill of lading issued at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s accordingly reduced to Rs. 20,000/-. Further, as the confiscation of the goods is as a result of sudden imposition of licencing regularities the appellant cannot be found guilty of mis-conduct or mala fide on the their part so as to impose personal penalty upon the appellant. Accordingly, I set aside the penalty. But for the above modification the appeal is otherwise rejected. - - TaxTMI - TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
