9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or there is any allegation against the petitioner that they smuggled those goods. The allegation itself is with regard to wrong availment of benefit of the exemption Notification. That apart, the eight consignments have all been together classified as garment accessories said to have contained various items. Thus it would be virtually impossible for the assessing group to separate various items and to cull out only Zip fasteners and treat them under a separate category as it is the goods mentioned under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 - As submitted by the DRI, the petitioner had admitted the entire allegation much prior to the issuance of the show cause notice and in fact, that was precisely the stand taken before the Settlement Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the allegation against the petitioner is that they sold the imported goods in the domestic market and violated the actual user condition of the said Notification. Due to mis-use and wrong availment, the total duty evaded on the goods under the eight bills of entry was computed at ₹ 23,19,372/-. It appears that the petitioner co-operated with the DRI during the course of investigation and admitted the mis-use and wrong availment of Notification benefits as well as the amount quantified as import duty and interest much prior to the issuances of the show cause notice. 3.On receipt of the show cause notice, the petitioner approached the Settlement Commission to settle their case stating that it is not a case of smuggling but only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order calls for interference and by order dated 24.08.2016 granted a stay of paragraph 7.1 of the impugned order. 5.During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the third respondent produced a note containing the gist of the communication from the Additional Director, DRI to the Commissioner of Customs, Legal-SEA, wherein the DRI has taken a stand that the petitioner's case relates to mis-use of import certificates issued by AEPC, Tirupur and the wrong availment of the Notification 21/2002; the bar provided under Section 127B for the admission of the petition before the Settlement Commission is relating to the goods specified under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 and even though the Zip fasteners, a specified i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
