9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed under Hazardous Waste Management Handling Rules, 2008 and having been imported without specific licence from the authorities they are liable for confiscation - Confiscation and redemption fine upheld. Penalty imposed on the firm ARJ Exim (India) - Held that:- It needs to be upheld as the goods which were imported are held liable for confiscation under Section 111 (d) and 111 (m) of the Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directed against Order-in-Appeal No: MUM-CUSTM-SMP-190 to 193/2016-17 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai-I 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, it transpires that the issue relates to redemption fine on confiscation of TV sets imported and in lieu of confiscation redemption fine is imposed and penalties imposed on the firm under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) sought for re-export of the goods to the country of origin which were permitted by the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority has held that the goods are liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) and (m) read with Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 and the rules made thereunder and Hazardous Waste Management Handling Rules, 2008. I find that there is no dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he adjudicating authority is in consonance with the standards laid down by the Tribunal. 6. Accordingly, I find no reason to interfere with such an order and penalty imposed on ARJ Exim (India) is upheld and the appeal filed by them is rejected. 7. As regards penalty of ₹ 1 lakh imposed on the individual Shri Manoj Kumar under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, I find that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
