2017 (9) TMI 1273

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the Ld. AR that it is a case of mis-declaration of quantity. The authorities below have rightly confiscated the impugned goods and imposed redemption fine and penalty, therefore, the confiscation of goods is upheld. Considering the fact that the differential duty is only 94000/- and mistake has been admitted by the supplier on the goods. In that circumstance, the redemption fine and penalt .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alert with regard to the valuation of such goods 10% of the goods were examined and it was found mis-declared, therefore, 100% examination was done and at the time of 100% examination, it was found that there is a difference in weight to the extent of 2000 kgs. In that circumstance, the goods were assessed and differential duty was demanded from the appellant which was accepted and paid by the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... highly excessive and the same are required to be reduced. 4. On the other hand, the ld. AR opposed the contention of the Ld. Counsel and submits that as the appellant being a regular importer, therefore, the appellant should know the excess quantity imported by them and they are required to be declared correct quantity of goods, therefore, the authorities below has rightly imposed 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