2006 (3) TMI 569

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imposition of penalty. 2. Penalty has been imposed on the ground that there was delay in satisfying the end-use condition in regard to the imported goods. The original authority confiscated the material and imposed fine and penalty. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the confiscation but upheld the penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) findings may be read: I have carefully gone t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ns of Notification supra has been substantially fulfilled and as such confiscation of the imported goods is not warranted and differential duty is not recoverable and RF is not imposable on the appellant. Accordingly, confiscation of impugned goods is set aside. Resultantly, RF, duty and interest is also set aside. As far as imposition of penalty is concerned, I find that appellant had submitted .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iscation has been set aside, penalty cannot be sustained inasmuch as penalty follows an offence in relation to goods, which have become liable to confiscation. 4. Perused the record and heard the learned DR. There is merit in the appellant s submission. Perusal of Section 112(a) shows that penalty is attracted, when acts or omission would render goods liable to confiscation under Section 111. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X