9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of export fine is reduced further to 50,000 - A/1384/2007-WZB/C-IV/(SMB), C/462/2007 - - - Dated:- 8-10-2007 - Shri A.K. Srivastava, Member (T) [Order per] - The appellants filed Bill of Entry No. 72991 dated 3-7-2006 for clearance of 417 pieces of Diamond studded gold jewellery. This jewellery was sent for exhibition at U.S.A. vide Shipping Bill No. 46701 dated 28-2-2006, afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not obtained any valid extension of the permission from the Development Commissioner for participating in other exhibitions, to move the goods from one exhibition to another, so as to explain the delay in returning the goods in the stipulated time frame. 4. During the intervening period, SEZ Rules 2006 became operational with effect from 10-2-2006. In SEZ Rules, as per para 9(iv) the stipu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoms Act, 1962, as the conditions subject to which goods were permitted for exports and re-imports are not met, the goods valued at Rs. 44,74,174/- are liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) and 111(o) of the Act, and the appellants are liable to penal action under Section 112(a) of the Act. 6. In view of the above, the appellants were called upon to show cause the Commissioner of Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Commissioner, the appellants have filed the instant appeal. 8. Heard both sides and perused the documents. 9. The appellants have contended that they are regular exporter and there is no loss of revenue or the foreign exchange involved. They had also written to the concerned authorities for the extension of time for re-import vide their letters dated 15-4-2006 and 10-5-2006, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew and imposed a nominal redemption fine of Rs. 2 lakhs on diamond studded gold jewellery valued at Rs. 44.75 lakhs (approximately). Redemption fine imposed is fair and reasonable and does not warrant any interference. 11. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, there is scope for further reduction in the penalty imposed on the appellants under Section 112(a) of the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
