9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... over all the grounds pleaded then by the appellant - The appellant is not in a position to controvert the visual evidence of the impugned goods being imported with the labels ‘stamping foil’ as unearthed during examination. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - APPEAL NO: C/155/2011 - A/87272/2018 - Dated:- 6-9-2018 - Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) And Shri Ajay Sharma, Member ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 2,47,473/-, confiscated the goods while allowing the same to be redeemed on payment of ₹ 12,00,000/-. Penalty of ₹ 6,00,000/- was also imposed under section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962. The first appellate authority confirmed the order of the lower authority leading to this appeal. 2. Appellant contends that the first appellate authority had failed to take into considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the aluminium foils are made out of aluminium plates whereas impugned imports consists of a coating of aluminium which can hardly be called aluminium foil . The appellant is not in a position to controvert the visual evidence of the impugned goods being imported with the labels stamping foil as unearthed during examination. 6. In view of the above, we find no flaw in the conclusions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
