9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as imposed on the goods imported vide Bill of Entry No. 3477710 dated 07/10/2013 under Section 125 of the Customs Act and a penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh was imposed on the appellant, M/s. Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd., under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before me. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that in the present case, the goods imported by the appellant were "Diet Coke Beverage Base" which was not for sale but was a raw material for making non-alcoholic beverages. Therefore, the product was not coming within the scope of Food Safety and Standards Act (FSS ACT) and therefore, the imposition of fine on the goods and penalty on the appellant on the ground of violati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew weeks old and NOC was not given by the FSS authorities, they had taken up the matter with the foreign supplier vide letter dated 09/12/2013 and 10/01/2014 and the foreign supplier had agreed to take back the goods. In these circumstances, imposition of penalty or redemption fine on the goods is not warranted and should be set aside. He also relies on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Guru Ispat Ltd., Vs. CC (Port), Calcutta - 2003 (151) ELT 384 (Tri-Kolkata) affirmed by the Apex Court reported in {2003 (157) ELT A87 (SC)] in support of the above contention. 3. The learned AR appearing for the Revenue on the other hand would support the impugned orders and submits that when the FSS authorities have declined to give no objectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot overlook or ignore the decision of the said authority. It is in this context, the issue has to be examined as to whether the goods are liable to confiscation or not. In the bill of entry, the appellant had not declared the shelf life of the product at all, whereas on testing, the goods were found to be wanting in shelf life as per the norms prescribed under the FSS Act. If that is so, it is a case of misdeclaration or non-declaration of the material particulars and in that view of the matter, the liability to confiscation under Section 111 (m) would arise. Inasmuch as the goods do not form to the provisions of FSS Act, they would also be liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d). Thus, though there is a contradiction in the findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
