9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1014X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal, they assert summarily, contesting the findings of the lower authorities. The appellant did not offer any material evidence to support his claim that the used garments imported by them are any different from the used garments which were compared as per the standing instructions and prevailing import value during the material time. They were of fully aware of the background of enhancement including the violation of import policy with reference to the import consignments. The import in violation of import policy has been made with full knowledge. There is no sustainable ground in the present appeals to merit consideration - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Customs Appeals No.59767-59768 of 2013 - C/A/56132-56133/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 16,30,126/- and ₹ 34,25,397/- in respect of two import consignments. Redemption fine of ₹ 4,07,600/- and ₹ 10,27,700/- respectively were fixed for redemption of the goods. Penalties of ₹ 2,44,600/- and ₹ 3,42,600/- respectively were imposed under Section 112 (a) of the Act. 2. On appeal vide the impugned orders while upholding the re-assessment of value, the Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the redemption fines to ₹ 2,25,000/- and ₹ 4,80,000/- respectively. He also reduced penalties to ₹ 1,45,000/- and ₹ 3,00,000/- respectively. 3. When the appeals are called none appeared on behalf of the appellant in spite of notice. As per appeal records the appeals were listed on many occ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded his reasons and enhanced the value. It is relevant to note that the appellant/importer is fully aware of background and the quantum of enhancement and chose to waive the requirement of written show cause notice as well as the opportunity of being heard before a decision is taken by the Original Authority. In the present appeal, they assert summarily, contesting the findings of the lower authorities. The appellant did not offer any material evidence to support his claim that the used garments imported by them are any different from the used garments which were compared as per the standing instructions and prevailing import value during the material time. They were of fully aware of the background of enhancement including the violati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
