9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal dated 22.03.2002 in appeal No. C/143/2001. 2. Facts in brief are as under: First petitioner is engaged in the manufacturing activities and the second petitioner is its General Manager. Petitioners have set up a steel plant at toranagallu in bellary district. Petitioner imports bearings which are required to be mounted on the machineries. Petitioners imported certain bearings for the manufacturing activities. The respondents in terms of their intelligence proceedings draw a Mahazar as in Annexure-A on 22.11.1997. According to the Mahazar, the petitioners removed certain goods contrary to the provisions of the Customs Act. The statement of one Sri. K. Sarover, General Manager of the petitioner Company, was recorded by the Senio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods on payment of a redemption fine of ₹ 12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs only) under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. (b) The Import duty amounting to ₹ 43,18,783/- on the said goods as detailed in Annexure A to the show cause notice dt.21.05.98 demanded in terms of the provisions of section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962, as discussed in para 7(F) above. (c).The interest on the above demanded duty amounting to ₹ 14,988/- (as detailed in Annexure B to the show cause notice 21.05.98) is also demanded in terms of the provisions of Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962, keeping in mind the provisions of Section 72 of the Customs Act, keeping in mind the provisions on interest liability in terms of section 28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed clearances removal took place from their custody as warehouse keeper under the Customs Act. There is also nothing on record as to how the Bond Officer allowed these clearances as the warehouse is normally kept under dual looking under both M/s. CWC and Customs Bond Officer. We also find that the Statement of Sri. K. Sarover does not directly audit that the specified number of bearings were cleared on a date prior to the dated of the Ex-bond bills of entry because the dates mentioned therein are the date with regard to the completion of the erection of the basic equipment on the foundation in the appellants premises and it is guitar possible the some dates may be different from the dated on which the bearings are actually removed. There i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in annexure A to the show cause notice dated 21.5.98 is demanded in terms of the provisions of Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962. (c) The interest on the above amount of duty of ₹ 14,12,988/- (as detailed in Annexure B to the show cause notice dated 21.05.98) is also demanded in terms of the provisions of Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962,keepin gin mind the provisions on interest liability in terms of Section 28 AB of the Customs Act, 1962. (d) I impose a penalty of ₹ 60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs only) on JVSL under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. (e) I drop the proposal to impose penalty on Shri R. K. Singhal, Director, JVSL and Shri P. K. Kedia, General Manager (Commercial) JVSL. (f) Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rover cannot from foundation for invoking the provisions of the Customs Act. He also refers to the bill of entry. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the material on record wall show that the petitioners have removed the materials from the custody of the Customs Authority and it is clear from the statement of Mr. K. Sarover. He justifies the impugned Orders. 7. I have carefully perused the material on record. The admitted facts reveal that the respondents drew a mahazar as per Annexure-A. There is the statement of Mr. K. Sarover at Annexure-B. Based on his statement, respondents issued a show-cause notice and the petitioners have replied to the same. Thereafter, the Commissioner of the Customs, in the firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der particularly in the light of the observations and finding in para-6 of the Tribunal s Order dated 31.8.1999. That fact finding should be in consonance with the earlier direction of the Tribunal. Therefore, instead of my considering the entire matter, I deem it proper that a remand is necessary particularly in the light of a Specific finding and specific direction in terms of para-6 of the Tribunal s order dated 31-8-1999. 9. In the result, these petitions are allowed. Impugned orders are set aside. Commissioner is directed to strictly follow the directions of the Tribunal in terms of para-6 of the Tribunal s Order dated 31.08.1999, and pass appropriate Order afresh in accordance with law, in the light of the material available on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
