2017 (7) TMI 1321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pect of description, classification and quantity of the impugned goods and the appellant had declared RSP - He, therefore, found that the adjudicating authority could not proceed to determine the MRP/RSP in absence of any enabling provisions in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Customs Appeal No. 3913/2012 - Final Order No. C/A/55541/2017-CU(DB) - D .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... so ordered to be confiscated with option to redeem the same on payment of fine. Penalties were imposed under Section 112 (a) and 114A of Customs Act, 1962. On appeal, vide the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) modified the original order and held penalties under action 114A is not applicable in the instant case and reduced fine and penalty to ₹ 35, 000/- each in terms of Sections 12 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the differential payment of duty, however, failed in upholding the penalty. 3. None appeared for the respondents. The Counsel on record submitted that he is withdrawing the Vakalatnama. We proceed to decide the case based on the case records and the submissions made by the Ld. AR, as the case has been listed on many occasions earlier with due notice. 4. On careful consideration .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X