9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement of the quanta of redemption fines and for imposition of penalties on these appellants under Section 112(a) of the Act is legally sustainable or not - prior to and after the period of imports, the item has always been freely importable - appellants to be actual users of the goods imported by them - Decided in the favour of assessee - C/1398, 1403 & 1460/2002 - A/385-387/2010-WZB/C-II/CSTB - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained from imposing any penalty on the importers under Section 112(a) of the Act after observing that there was no misdeclaration of any kind by them and that the above item was freely importable prior to and after the period of imports. The orders of adjudication were reviewed and appeals filed with the Commissioner (Appeals) by the department, wherein the prayer was to enhance the quanta of fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s has made an endeavour to make out a case for setting aside the confiscation as well. The learned SDR has objected to this prayer by pointing out that the orders of adjudication confiscating the goods under Section 111(d) of the Act were not challenged by any of these appellants. We have found a valid point for the SDR. The orders of adjudication were not challenged by the appellants and, therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ired specific licence for importation. The goods so imported would attract Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, as rightly found by the original authority. However, we also note that both prior to and after the period of imports, the item has always been freely importable. We also note that the original authority found the appellants to be actual users of the goods imported by them. Nevertheless, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
