2015 (11) TMI 136

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the provisions of Section 45 of the Customs Act. In such circumstances, when the confiscation was held to be valid, we are of the view that reducing the redemption fine from ₹ 1.2 crores to merely ₹ 1 lac was not proper. We have considered this aspect. According to us the interest of justice would be subserved in fixing the redemption fine to the extent of 50% of the fine imposed by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at Jamnagar of which the respondent was made Custodian. The respondent filed Bills of Entry. However, without paying the customs duty, the respondent as a Custodian shifted the goods from jetty area to the project site which was about 20 kilometers away. When the place was inspected and the Revenue Authorities came to know about the aforesaid shifting, show cause notice was issued for confiscatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4. To sum up, we order as under:- a) Liability of the imported goods to confiscation is upheld as it is not challenged. b) Redemption fine in lieu of confiscation is reduced to ₹ 1,00,000/-. c) EPCG licence covering the goods in question is accepted. d) Duty of ₹ 5,83,81,368/- already paid is the correct duty payable. e) The duty demand in excess of the am .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X