9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 613X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods - 627.192 MTs of imported stainless steel sheets/coils seized at M/s.Massey Godown are very much liable for confiscation u/s 111(o) of the CA, 1962 - for the limited purpose of considering the quantum of redemption fine under Section 125 ibid, the matter is being remanded to the adjudicating authority. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - C/369/2007 - 40877/2017 - Dated:- 29-5-2017 - Smt. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member Technical Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the appellant None for the respondent ORDER Per: Madhu Mohan Damodhar The facts of the case are that the respondent importers had obtained nine advance licences permitting import of 9887.698 MTs o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were got tested by the department and found these goods were not being manufactured out of AISI 304 grade steel that was actually imported; hence it appeared that the said goods as well as 103.679 MTs of export vessels had been manufactured only with locally purchased steel. In view of these facts which emerged in the investigation, it appeared to the department that the respondent had diverted 8816.134 MTs of imported stainless steel plates/coils in the local market. 3. Investigations culminated in issue of a SCN dated 30.05.2005, inter-alia proposing denial of benefit of customs duty exemption, demand of differential customs duty of ₹ 42,30,09,885/- along with interest thereon, confiscation of imported goods alleged to be diverte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey Godown, it has been sufficiently established that they are part of the duty free consignment of stainless steel sheets/coils imported by the respondent through nine advance licences. This fact has also been admitted in the statement of Shri V. Subramanian, Managing Director of the importer. Ld. AR pointed out that the said statement has not been retracted at any stage. This being so, the decision of the adjudicating authority not to confiscate the said goods only on the ground that the goods were stored in their hired premises that importer had seven other licences where the export obligation period was not yet over and the same could have been used by them for manufacture of export goods is not correct. The said 627.192 MTs goods theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is the reason why the adjudicating authority found it proper not to confiscate the goods. However, we are unable to fathom why the goods imported by the respondent availing duty exemption thereon, on the condition of using them in manufacture and export of stainless steel vessels, should be found in any other place other than the manufacturing premises. That these goods were very much part of the consignment imported by the respondent has also been established and further admitted by Shri V. Subramaniyam, Managing Director of the respondent firm. Thus, there is substance in the allegation raised in the SCN that the M/s. Massey Godown was used only as a intermediate place for the purpose of diversion and sale of the goods. In the circ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
