9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The applicant had imported a car, clearance of which was allowed under Bill of Entry dated 21-1-1998 on the basis of the importer s declaration and the documents filed with the Bill of Entry. The Department instituted an investigation into this import and, on the basis of its results, issued a show cause notice to the applicant proposing to confiscate the car under Section 111 of the Customs A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The applicant had obtained release of the car (which had been seized by the investigators of the Department) on production of a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 4,92,855/- (being the assessable value of the vehicle) on the strength of an order of the Hon ble High Court. The Department encashed the bank guarantee on 15-7-2002, i.e., prior to institution of the captioned appeal. This fact, evid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 92,855 minus Rs. 4,75,000, it is not in dispute that this amount does not represent redemption fine or penalty. In other words, the amount of Rs. 17,855/- is not a part of the subject-matter of the dispute settled in the above final order. I do not think that any authority flows to the Tribunal under Rule 40 or under Rule 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 (invoked by the applicant) to order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
