2017 (8) TMI 495

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... st the impugned order dated 31.8.2010 whereby the Commissioner (A) has disposed of 11 appeals by a common order and the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeals of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant had imported 240 units of used analogue copier machines with accessories and attachments vide invoice dated 20.10.2009. On arrival of the goods in Customs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was also imposed. The appellant paid entire amount of duty, fine and penalty imposed by the Revenue and cleared the goods and thereafter, challenged the imposition of fine and penalty before the Commissioner (A), who rejected the appeal of the appellant. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order imposing redemption f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s are liable to be confiscated. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record and the impugned order, I find that the imposition of fine and penalty in the present case is not exorbitant because the imported photocopier during the relevant time was not permissible to import under Foreign Trade Policy without a license as it was restricted item, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X