2008 (9) TMI 800

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) bearing No. CCA/265/ICD/D.II/2005 dated 25-11-2005. 2. We have heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts in brief are as follows :- (a) The appellant filed Bill of Entry for the imported goods by declaring the same as 62.361MT of HMS scrap which he had .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts that as a buyer on High Sea sale, they had no means of knowing what exactly was contained in the consignment; they declared on the basis of invoice presented to them. In such a situation, no allegation of mis-declaration can be sustained against the appellant and that confiscation and imposition of penalty are not warranted. However, he accepted the enhancement of value and consequent demand of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ey were not aware of the nature of goods purchased by them, does not appeal to common sense. The confiscation of Polythene granules under Section 111(m) is fully justified. However, we are not fully convinced in the facts of the present case, that the said granules have been concealed in the consignment attracting Section 119 of the Customs Act. 7. In the light of the above and having regard to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X