9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chnical expert in the field to ascertain whether goods in question were scrap or some other articles, which were not usable for melting purpose. However, decision with regard to nature of the goods cannot be ascertained by eye estimate and an expert opinion is required for ascertaining such facts. Thus we are of the view that customs examination report, without obtaining the expert opinion, cannot be the reason to determine the nature of goods and that mere agreement by the appellant or his employee with the contents of such examination report cannot be considered as conclusive proof in support of claim of revenue regarding confiscation of goods, payment of fine and penalty. Redemption fine and penalty not imposable - appeal allowed - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proposed for confiscation of goods, re-determination of value and imposition of penalty. The matter was adjudicated vide order dated 31.03.2011, wherein the imported goods were confiscated under Section 111(l) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962, with the option to redeem the same on redemption fine of ₹ 30,00,000/-. The said order also re-determined the value of disputed goods at ₹ 2,74,72,849/- under Rule 9 of the CVR, 2007 and imposed penalty of ₹ 15,00,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Act. On appeal, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 27.09.2011 has set aside enhancement of value and reduced the redemption fine to ₹ 10,00,000/- and the quantum of penalty to ₹ 5,00,000/-. In suppo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the Tribunal has allowed the appeal in favour of the appellant under similar set of facts. 4. On the other hand, the Learned DR appearing for Revenue reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and further submitted that since on first check basis, the department had observed that the imported goods were different than those declared in the bill of entry, confiscation of the same and imposition of redemption fine and penalty is proper and justified. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. The issue involved in this appeal for consideration is, whether the subject goods are liable for confiscation and the authorities below are justified in imposing fine and penalty on the appellant. 7. We have perused the ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
