9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e view that merely because the appellant claimed such classification it cannot be tantamount to mis-declaration. The only implication in case of CTH 8705, Homologation certificate has to be produced and in other classification the same is not required. The whole issue gets boiled down to the point that even if it is presumed that the goods is classified under CTH 8705 the only lapse on the part of the appellant is that they have not produced Homologation certificate. It is also observed that the claim of the appellant of classification under CTH 8413 does not benefit them in respect of custom duty, for the reason that the goods falling under CTH 8705 or 8413, both are eligible for exemption notification No. 21/2002-Cus. Redemption fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case is that the appellant filed Bill of Entry No. 848912 dated 20/4/2005 for clearance of mobile concrete pump placer boom pump of 120 Cu. MT capacity mounted on Volvo Chasis. The appellant claimed the classification of the product under CTH 8705 and claimed the benefit of notification No. 21/2002 Sr. No. 230, List No. 18(Item No. 17). The exemption is available on the vehicle amounted mobile concrete pump as exclusively used for National Highway authority of India(NHAI), JNPT Road Project for which undertaking has been submitted by the Importer. They also submitted a letter No. 11011/7/2003-GM(PC) dated 19/4/2005 issued by Member (Finance), NHAI stating that the subject equipment is required for construction of road for the above said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oms Act, 1962 hence liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962. Accordingly order for confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) with option of redemption of the goods on payment of fine of ₹ 5 lacs and penalty of ₹ 50,000/- was also imposed under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. 3. Shri. Prashant Patankar, Ld Consultant for the appellant submits that they made detailed submission on the classification, however he conceded that if the bench takes lenient view and reduce the penalty taking into consideration over all facts and circumstances, he gives up the issue of classification and requested that in such case the issue of classification maybe kept open. As regard the redemption fine and penalty h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part of the appellant is that they have not produced Homologation certificate. It is also observed that the claim of the appellant of classification under CTH 8413 does not benefit them in respect of custom duty, for the reason that the goods falling under CTH 8705 or 8413, both are eligible for exemption notification No. 21/2002-Cus. 6. As per our above discussion and taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that redemption fine and penalty imposed by the Adjudicating authority require reduction. Since we are deciding only quantum of redemption fine and penalty, we are not addressing legal issue of classification of the goods therefore the same is kept open. The redemption fine is reduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
