9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfiscated goods that enables the adjudicating authority to permit its redemption on payment of the prescribed fine. Without the wherewithal to return the goods on fulfilment of the condition of fine, the imposition of redemption fine is an exercise in futility. Imposition of redemption fine does not of itself create a debt to the government. The option to redeem his one that has to be exercised by the person to whom that offer has been extended. The imposition of fine in the impugned order is, therefore, set aside. Personal penalty on officers - Held that: - it must be borne in mind that these are employees of a public sector enterprise and who would not have derived any benefit personally from an act of ‘smuggling’ of ‘liquefied petrol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the importer and the canalising agency. Here, it may be noted that M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd is designated as canalising agency for import of liquefied petroleum gas under the Foreign Trade Policy notified under the Foreign Trade (Development Regulation) Act, 1992. The distributors of the product in the country are, under law, required to procure these goods only through the canalising agency. Failure to do so would render the goods liable to confiscation for being in violation of the Foreign Trade Policy. 3. Under this mandated procurement system, the canalising agency levied a fee of 1.5% of C F value up to 31 st March 2004 and 0.5% thereafter. In the show cause notice leading to the impugned order, it is alleged that the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal on this very issue. 5. We have heard Learned Counsel for appellants at length. Learned Authorised Representative drew attention to the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Hyderabad Industries Ltd v. Union of India [2000 (115) ELT 593 (SC)] which has held that the service charges paid to canalising agent is liable to be included in the assessable value of imported goods. This aspect does not appear to be in dispute as a perusal of the decision of the empowered Committee on Disputes indicated that, while according clearance to the continuation of the dispute before the Tribunal on fine and penalty, the duty liability was not a subject of appeal. The issue of duty liability is yet to be decided upon by the first appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tedly, such piecemeal adjudication is not a good practice in an environment that recommends certainty of taxation. It must be noted that Revenue was not an appeal, at any stage, in relation to the assessment orders in these nine imported consignments. The action of the tax authorities therefore becomes questionable as a less than straightforward strategy to bypass the appellate procedure to revisit a matter in which Revenue did not have a grievance in the first place. The resort to the proviso in section 28 appears to have been prompted by the failure to undertake review of the order of the original authority within the prescribed time limit. We do not wish to dilate further on this transgression from the ideal. 8. It is very clear that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
