9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 496X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The facts of the case are substantially covered in the Interim Order No. 30/2004-Cus., dated 26-7-2004. Briefly stated the facts as stated in the Interim Order are as under :- On a specific information that a car was imported in the name of Shukoor Kottayil, misusing Transfer of Residence facility, all the documents pertaining to the Bill of Entry bearing No. 399441 dated 14-10-2003 filed in the name of Shri Shukoor Kottayil (applicant) declaring the goods as One used Toyota Car CHS No UZJ 100-0120841 were called for by the Central Intelligence Unit of New Customs House, Mumbai for scrutiny. Statements of various persons were also recorded. Investigations revealed that the applicant was not owning a vehicle abroad and his name had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the Secretariat to communicate the following minuted observations of the Commission to the Commissioner of Customs (Imports), New Custom House, Mumbai with a copy to the Chief Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Zone I : Commission can t review its own order and vacate the interim order allowing the application to be proceeded with and release of car on payment of duty and execution of bond and furnishing of Bond Guarantee. If Revenue is aggrieved of our order then the proper course is to approach a higher Court. They can t sit on our order. That would be chaotic and would subvert the judicial system. We hope, Revenue is not out to subvert the system. 5.2.It was thereafter that Revenue, in the month of February 2005 were finally plea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Act. 7.2A special prayer was made for immunity under FEMA on the ground that the powers of adjudication under the same are being exercised by the Officers of Customs and Central Excise. [Source : M.F. (D.R.) Order S.O. No. 1155(E) dated 5-1-2001; M.F. (D.R.) Order S.O. No. 1156 (E) dated 5-1-2001 and M.F. (D.R) Order No. 1157(E) dated 5-1-2001]. 8.Nobody was present on behalf of the Revenue. 9.The Bench has gone through the case records and the pleas put forth by the applicant. The Bench finds that in this case, the duty admitted is equal to the duty proposed in the Show Cause Notice based on the given assessable value and has been paid by the applicant as mentioned at para 5.2. (supra). Accordingly the following terms and conditio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
