2001 (3) TMI 538

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. Ratan Udyog is whether the goods are liable for confiscation under the Customs Act and penalty is imposable for not declaring the content of the goods meant for export. 2. When the matter was called, no one was present on behalf of the appellants. It is observed from the appeal file that the appellants have never appeared in the past also. We, t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned SDR submitted that when the goods were declared fabrics there was no reason for the appellants to describe them as woven fabrics except for the purpose of claiming more draw-back and therefore the mala fide intention is apparent and as such the goods have been rightly confiscated and penalty has rightly been imposed that neither the amount of redemption fine nor the penalty is on higher si .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ods were misdeclared. He observed that the appellants defence before the Commissioner was that it was a genuine mistake and they had indicated the mistake themselves to the department. This has not been rebutted by the department before us. The appellants have also submitted copies of the letters which the Custom House Agent had addressed to the Assistant Commissioner requesting for amendment in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X