9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri A. Jayachandran, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T) (Oral)]. All the appeals are directed against the same order. Accordingly, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. We have perused the records and heard both sides. 3. The appellant, Jayakrishna Aluminium Ltd. imported aluminium ingots and cleared them through the customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne of Rs. 5.00 lakhs] and imposed equal penalties of Rs. 4.00 lakhs on the appellant-company as well as its Managing Director Shri Vidya Sagar. Interest was also demanded. The present appeals challenge the aforesaid order. 4. The very first contention of the Counsel for the appellants is that the order has not taken into account the appellant s claim of export of over 14 tonnes of materials unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest was incorporated subsequent to the import of the goods. 5. Ld. DR has emphasised that the evidence on record fully justifies the impugned order inasmuch as the violation export obligation remains admitted. 6. The appellant s liability to pay duty is clear inasmuch as the duty-free clearance of the goods was subject to the condition that produce from it would be exported. However, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above the appeal of Jayaprakash Aluminium Ltd. is partly allowed in regard to redemption fine and interest. With regard to the amount of duty, the Commissioner is directed to pass a fresh order after hearing the appellant in regard to export under Shipping Bill No. 717392, dated 1-2-1996. The appeal of the Managing Director is allowed by setting aside the penalty imposed on him. 9. All the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
