9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Button Cells under Bills of Entry. After assessment on second check basis and payment of duty, Customs clearance was given. However, the consignments were intercepted by Customs (P) Officers working under Commissioner of Customs (P). Investigations revealed that the watch parts did not bear any brand name or any other mark on them or on the packing. The country of origin was mentioned at the foot of the invoice as 'China/Japan' which was found to be misleading. In the case of button cells it was revealed that they bore the inscription 'Japan' on them. In the case of button cells of CR3032 type, the same goods were declared of Chinese origin in one Bill of Entry and of Japan in another Bill of Entry. The authorized signatory of the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the button cells sold by Timex Watches to arrive at the retail price of the goods in question taking into account the brand value of the Timex Watches, Franchise. In his order the adjudicating authorities revalued all the goods and demanded appropriate duty. Further confiscated the goods under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) read with provisions of Section 117 of Indian Trade and Merchandise Act, and imposed fine in lieu of confiscation. Also imposed penalties on the appellant, its Proprietor and Shri Mohinderpal Singh. In the first appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. 3. The first contention of Ld. Advocate is that Customs Preventive Officers did not have jurisdiction in this case. We find in this ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 129D as it stood then. 4. The next argument of the Ld. Advocate that goods which are not available for confiscation cannot be confiscated and redemption fine imposed . We find in this case that the goods were released provisionally on execution of bond. In such cases it is the terms and conditions of the bond which will govern the issue of confiscation and redemption fine. In this case the appellant executed a bond binding themselves towards the full value of the goods, duty and redemption fine as condition for provisional release. Therefore the judgment cited by the Ld. Advocate do not come to his aid. However we do agree that penalties cannot be imposed on both the properietoryship and proprietor. This is the established legal positio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
