2003 (10) TMI 485

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. The facts leading to the filing of the present applications are that against the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, holding 750 packages containing cotton knitted T-shirts liable to confiscation under Section 113(i) of the Customs Act and imposing of a fine of Rs. 15 lakhs due to non-availability of the goods, due to their .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... legal submission raised before us is that Section 113(i) of the Customs Act, which has been invoked against the applicants, is not attracted as the goods were not even attempted to be exported inasmuch as they were intercepted after being loaded on trucks and tempo outside the godown of M/s. Shriram Warehousing Corporation, Bhiwandi, and the applicants have stated that the goods were not for expo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the goods, thus attracting the provisions of Section 113(i) of the Customs Act. He further submits that the non-cancellation of shipping bills in September, 2000 by the applicants would also show that they were attempting to export the goods. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and find prima facie force in the contention that the action of the applicants in loading of the good .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X