9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hs Ten Thousand only) on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant was intercepted on 18/09/1998 by the officers of the Air Intelligence Unit, Calicut, when he arrived from Riyadh via Mumbai and seized 59 Gold Biscuits with foreign markings totally weighing 6879.400 grams valued at Rs. 30,20,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Twenty Thousand only) (then market value). After completion of the investigation, show-cause notice dated 31/03/1999 was issued to the appellant and other 10 co-noticees to show-cause as to why the contraband (gold) should not be confiscated and penalty should not be imposed. After due process of law, the Commissioner vide the order dated 06/12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 21,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs only) is not in consonance with the settled position of law in fixation of redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. He further submitted that imposing such a huge fine is not in consonance with the direction of the Tribunal while remanding the case wherein the Tribunal has observed that the original authority will re-adjudicate the case after allowing the appellant to redeem the goods on payment of reasonable fine. He also submitted that the original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) whereas on remand by the Commissioner, the Commissioner has proceeded to impose a penalty of Rs. 2,10,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Ten Thousand only) without attributin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of the seized gold is to be seen at the time of seizure which was valued at Rs. 30,20,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Twenty Thousand only). Further, we find that if the market value of the impugned goods is Rs. 30,20,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Twenty Thousand only) then the imposition of fine of Rs. 21,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs only) is on a higher side. Further, in view of the decision relied upon by the appellant cited supra, we are of the considered view that the imposition of fine of Rs. 21,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs only) is on the higher side which is reduced to Rs. 7,50,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) (approximately 25% of the market value of the gold). As far as imposition of penalty of Rs. 2,10,000/- (R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
