9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 487/- paid by the appellant during investigation is not sufficient to safeguard the interest of the Revenue. The appellant, therefore, are directed to deposit an amount of ₹ 5,00,000 alongwith appropriate interest in addition the amount already paid by them within a period of six weeks from the date of this order. Compliance is to be reported on 23rd February, 2015. On payment of this amount within the stipulated period, the requirement of balance amount of duty demand, interest thereon and penalty shall stand waived and recovery thereof stayed. - Partial stay granted. - Customs Stay Application No. 52887 of 2014, Appeal No. 52361 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 8-12-2014 - G. Raghuram And Rakesh Kumar,JJ. For the Appellant : Ms Reena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner vide order-in-original dated 28/06/13 by which the above-mentioned customs duty demand was confirmed against the appellant firm alongwith interest and beside this, penalty of equal amount was imposed on the appellant firm under Section 112 (a) and readwith Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 and the amount of ₹ 1,16,487/- already paid was appropriated towards this demand. The Additional Commissioner also imposed redemption fine of ₹ 20 lakhs in respect of the goods held to be liable for confiscation. On appeal being filed to Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 31/01/14 upheld the customs duty demand and also imposition of equal penalty under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962, but set aside the redemption fine on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order is not correct, that the appellant have strong prima facie case in their favour and hence the amount already paid by the appellant during investigation may be considered as sufficient for hearing of the appeal and the requirement of pre-deposit of balance amount of the duty demand, interest and penalty may be waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof may be stayed till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Mrs. Suchitra Sharma, the learned Jt. CDR, opposed the stay application and reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, pleaded that in this case, the declared value of the goods imported, which are brass items, is less than the price of brass scrap during that period, that this fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd not from a manufacturer and the invoices regarding the price at which the goods were purchased by the supplier from the manufacturers have not been produced. In view of this, we hold that the appellant have not been able to establish prima facie case in their favour and as such the amount of ₹ 1,16,487/- paid by the appellant during investigation is not sufficient to safeguard the interest of the Revenue. The appellant, therefore, are directed to deposit an amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) alongwith appropriate interest in addition the amount already paid by them within a period of six weeks from the date of this order. Compliance is to be reported on 23rd February, 2015. On payment of this amount within the stipula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
