2005 (9) TMI 629

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent. ORDER The appellants have imported a consignment of textiles and filed a Bill of Entry declaring the goods as polyester dyed fabrics. The goods were cleared on second check and, on examination, were found to contain a higher percentage of texturised yarn not as per the specification. The goods were ordered to be confiscated and the redemption fine of ₹ 8.00 lakhs was imposed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... request on re-export in such cases, where the goods are not prohibited for import is well settled. No one would like to re-export the goods which the suppliers have correctly supplied. Each case has to be determined as regards the liabilities to confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act, 1962. In this case, the percentage of texturised yarn in the fabrics declared was within the knowledge o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed at ₹ 80,000/- (Rupees Eighty thousand only) and keeping the facts and circumstances of this case, we would consider that a token penalty of ₹ 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) would be sufficient on the importing firm and we find no case or cause for upholding separate penalty of ₹ 2.00 lakhs imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the partner. That penalty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X