9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 546X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s modified the order of re export to one of release of goods for home consumption on payment of redemption fine and penalty as ordered by the original authority - no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Revisional Authority. There is no illegality or flaw in the order under challenge. - 12916 and M.P. No. 18998 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 21-10-2009 - R. Sudhakar, J REPRESENTED BY: Shri K.M. Venugopal, for the Petitioner. Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The writ petition has been filed to quash the orders passed in No. 560 of 2000 dated 8-11-2000 by the first respondent in Revision petition modifying the order in C4/253/0/2000-AIR, C. Cus. No. 425/2000 dated 12-6-2000 of the second respondent in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dified the said order and allowed to re-export the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 65,000/-. The appellate authority, confirmed the penalty of Rs. 21,000/-. 4. Thereafter, the petitioner-passenger filed a Revision before the first respondent, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance. Be fore the said authority, it was pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's children were studying in Chennai and the goods were brought for children and to give as gifts to the family members who are taking care of the children. The counsel also pleaded that the quantity of the goods were not mis-declared and they were not in commercial quantity. The higher penalty and the fine should be reduced, if not t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was rightly passed. The quantum of fine and penalty is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Revisional authority considered the case on merits in its proper perspective, passed the impugned order and there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order to challenge the same before this Court. 8. As far as merits of the case is concerned, the facts remains that the value of the goods have been declared as Rs. 50,000/-; however, on examination the authorities found that the value of the goods was Rs. 2,12,700/-. Therefore, there is mis-declaration with regard to the value of the goods. The authorities also found that the goods are in commercial quantity brought by the passenger coming from abroad. This will be supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
