9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be imposed u/s 114 had to be equal to the duty sought to be evaded – court followed the judgement of COMMR. OF CUSTOMSTuticorin Vs Sai Copiers 2008 (1) TMI 402 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS – court reduced the penalty – decided partly in favour of assessee - C/256/2012 - FINAL Order No. 400192013 - Dated:- 30-1-2013 - Shri Mathew John, J. For the Appellant : Shri T. Sundaranathan , ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port that the description of the goods did not satisfy the norms and condition of Public Notice No.3- ETC( PN)/92-97, dated 27.05.1992 for the type of finished leather as declared. Against the above background, the adjudicating authority confiscated 4,803 sq.ft . of consignments valued at Rs.2,62,041/- and allowed its redemption on payment of a fine of Rs.35,000/-. Further, a penalty of Rs.5 ,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... match was that it did not fit into the type of finished leather, which was declared in the shipping bills. Therefore, the case made out that the appellants had attempted to evade export duty is not correct. In his opinion, the original penalty of Rs.5 ,000 / - is more than what was warranted. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the interpretation of the Commissioner (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed is excessive. 5. Opposing the prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AR for the Revenue submits that since the appellants have accepted the mis -declaration of goods and took back the goods out of Customs custody accepting the mis -declaration, they cannot re-contest the issue, that there was mis -declaration. Testing the goods showed 'absence of wax coat, absence of b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
