9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 812X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were without any shipping documents passed by the Customs in violation of provisions of the Act – Goods were rightly held liable for confiscation by the original authority for violation of the Customs Act - Once the goods are confiscated redemption fine needs to be imposed – however find and penalty reduced. - C/229/2010-Mum - A/393/2011-WZB/SMB/C-IV - Dated:- 27-9-2011 - Shri Sahab Singh, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri S.N. Kantawala, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Prabhakar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. This is an appeal filed by M/s. Helvoet Rubber Plastics Tech. India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as appellant) against the order-in-appeal No. 773[TLP(X)] 2009(JNCH)/EXP 50, dated 21-12-2009 passed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without examination of the goods by the proper officer of the customs. Such attempt to improperly export the goods amounted to violations of provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant without complying the Customs legalities had illegally exported the goods to a place outside India. In view of these observations, the case was adjudicated by the Jt. Commissioner of Customs, who held that for deliberate attempt to export the goods without proper examination, documents and permission from the proper officer of Customs, the goods became liable for confiscation under Section 113(f) (g) of the Customs Act, and accordingly the appellant became liable for penalty. The redemption fine of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had not been considered by the adjudicating authority and especially the fact that the goods were lying for almost 9 months. The appellant has already suffered a heavy financial loss and paid the fine only with a view to meet the export order. He, therefore prayed that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the order-in-appeal needs to be set aside. 4. The learned JDR appearing for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the lower authorities and submitted that the appellants have attempted to avail the facility of direct entry under the guise of self sealed provisions without any permission from the Central Excise authority and they exported the goods without complying the provisions of the Customs Act. Therefore, the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
