9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Bill 2015 - Held that: - Admittedly, in the port of import now under consideration the customs operations are not available on 13.06.2015 being second Saturday. As such, the possibility of getting endorsement and paying the penalty of 15% on 13.06.2015 was not available to the appellant - Considering such factual position and applying the provisions of Section 9 & 10 of General Clauses Act, 1897, we find that the compliance is to be taken as in time. Accordingly, in terms of Sub-Section (6) of Section 28 the proceedings against all the parties involved in the case shall conclude on payment of full differential duty with applicable interest along-with 15% of penalty. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Customs Appeal No.C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,00,000/- was imposed on Viswanath Saboo, Partner / Director of the importing firm, under Section 114A and 114 AA of the Act. 2. The ld. Counsel appearing for both the appellants submits on the following lines:- (a) Confiscation of goods valued at ₹ 1.02 Crores is not legally tenable as the said goods were neither detained nor seized and released on a bond and hence, the question of confiscating them and ordering release of them on fine is without legal basis. (b) Regarding differential duty, interest and penalty, it is submitted that the differential duty alongwith interest has already been paid during the course of investigation and subsequent to passage of Finance Bill, 2015, they have also deposited 15% of the dispu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used the appeal records. 5. On the first issue regarding the legal tenability of confiscation of goods, which are neither detained nor seized by the customs authorities, we hold that there is no legal support to confiscate the goods, which were neither detained nor seized and thereafter released with a conditional bond. As such, the question of confiscating the goods, which are neither in custody nor bound to be presented as per the bond, is not legally sustainable. Accordingly, the confiscation of goods worth ₹ 1,02,59,039/-, which were already assessed and cleared without any condition, is not sustainable. 6. On the issue of application of Section 28 (5) as per the new amendment carried out in Finance Act, 2015, we note, the w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
