9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at M/s.Shree Maruti Impex and other co-noticees filed appeals against the impugned OIO No.20685/2013 dt. 13.6.2013 against which the present appeals are filed before the Tribunal. Held that: - as the Tribunal already remanded the matter in respect of other adjudication orders dt.22.11.2012 and 12.6.2013, it is appropriate that the present appellants also should be given an opportunity to defend their case before the adjudicating authority - matter remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide the claim of the ownership of the seized goods as claimed by M/s.Nupur Impex in terms of the order of the Hon'ble High Court on the basis of documents and provisions of Customs Act and thereafter to decide the case in respect of the other co-noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g exemption under Customs Notification No.96/2009 Cus. dt. 11.09.2009 and obtained advance license under DEEC scheme upon condition that the resultant product to be exported. The officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) made an investigation and found that appellant M/s.Shree Maruti Impex had earlier cleared the goods after claiming the exemption under DEEC scheme and diverted the goods in local market. Hence, the present consignments were seized. By the impugned order, the adjudicating authority denied the benefit of exemption notification and confirmed the demand of duty on the present consignment and earlier consignment, which have already been cleared along with interest and penalty and redemption fine on various persons. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pto the Tribunal and by Final order dt.27.6.2011, the Tribunal set aside the order and directed the Commissioner to reconsider the matter. It appears that only two importers M/s.Ravi Enterprises and M/s.Maruti Impex (appellant herein) filed Bills of Entry for release of the goods. Hence the DRI issued two show cause notices separately. The Commissioner of Customs (Seaport-Export) adjudicated the proceedings initiated in both the SCNs and by OIO No.20684/2013 dt.12.6.13 and 20685/13 dt. 13.6.13 against both the importers respectively denied the benefit of Exemption Notification No.96/2009 (supra) and demanded duty along with interest and fine and penalty. 7. The Commissioner of Customs (Export) has also passed another OIO No.19798/12 dt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdance with law. So, the impugned orders are set aside to the extent of appeals filed by the appellants and all the appeals are allowed by way of remand. Needless to say that the adjudicating authority shall give proper opportunity of hearing before passing of the orders. Stay applications are disposed of. 9. We have noticed that the Hon'ble Madras High Court by two orders dated 13.8.2010 and 12.9.2012 and the Tribunal also in earlier order dt. 27.6.2011 directed to decide the matters within the specified time as mentioned therein as the goods are perishable nature, and therefore we direct the adjudicating authority to decide the matter within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Appellants are also directed to co operat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
