9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... willful act, negligence or default of the exporter, his agent of employee. From the facts of this case, it is clear that the appellant has taken proper care before the exportation of the goods. In this circumstance, it cannot be held that the appellants have violated the provisions of Section 113 (k) of the Act. In these circumstances, I hold that the goods are not liable for confiscation and cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e not examined at the end of the manufacturer/supplier they were examined in the docks by the surveyor of the buyer at Docks wherein it was found out of 10,000 bags, 5980 bags were not upto the standard grade. These bags therefore, were not loaded on the vessel and were taken back to the unit. In the circumstances, proceedings were initiated against the appellant for confiscation of the goods for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are liable for confiscation, consequently, the redemption fine and penalty were imposed. He further submits that as there was no intention of the appellant to export the non-standard goods. In this circumstance, the goods are not liable for confiscation hence, redemption fine and penalty are not imposable. 5. The learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y rule made under this Act for carrying out the purposes of that Chapter have been contravened.] From the reading of the above provisions, it is clear that the goods can be held liable for confiscation on account of any willful act, negligence or default of the exporter, his agent of employee. From the facts of this case, it is clear that the appellant has taken proper care before the exportati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
