9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Bill of Entry dated 2/9/2013 at JNCH, Nhavasheva Port. The net weight was declared as 108.708 MTs and the declared unit price as USD 578.852 PMT CIF, the total assessable value as per declaration was Rs. 41,53,332/- and duty payable was computed at Rs. 11,98,313/-. The goods were examined under first check with specific examination order - to state whether the goods are restricted or not in terms of the licensing Note to Chapter 72 of ITC (HSN) of the Foreign Trade Policy 200914. On examination the goods were found as declared, except that the goods were restricted item in terms of the Foreign Trade Policy. The Revenue felt that the same cannot be imported at JNCH without valid import licence. However the Licensing Note 1 to Chapter 72 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so the importer have not produced any valid import licence and hence the impugned goods were held liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Act and the same was held redeemable on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 10,40,000/- and further penalty, under Section 112(a) of the Act, was imposed for an amount of Rs. 4,20,000/-. 4. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order has been pleased to allow the appeal in part and reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 4,20,000/- and also reduced the penalty under Section 112(a) to Rs. 50,000/-. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) also held that penalty and fine can be imposed on the basis of facts, placing reliance on the ruling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs. Tushar Impex - 2013 (295) ELT 610 wherein under the facts that the Port of export having not been notified Port for import of cosmetics, which was subsequently declared as authorized port, imported cosmetics found fit for release by the Asst. Drugs Controller and that in view of this technical violations the redemption fine and penalty was reduced. 6. The learned AR relies on the impugned order. 7. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that it is an admitted fact that the appellant imported the goods under one of a mistake. The violation of port restriction is only a venial breach. It is also not a fact that the appellant is a repeated offender. In view of the technical breach, and for tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
