9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 74 for reexport of goods imported have not been violated by the appellant - when the goods allowed to be reexported by the Commissioner(Appeals), then the imposition of redemption fine and penalty is not sustainable in view of the various decisions relied upon by the appellant. Tribunal in the case of Kenda Farben India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2018 (10) TMI 1571 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD ], has held that imposition of redemption fine is not justified when permission was granted to reexport the goods. Thus, imposition of fine and penalty not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - SHRI S.S. GARG, JUDCIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Ms. Devika, ADVOCATE For the Respondent : Shri K.B. Nanaiah, Assistant Commisisoner(AR) ORDER The p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut allowed redemption for re-export on payment of a fine of ₹ 50,000/- and penalty of ₹ 25,000/-. The adjudicating authority also found that the goods can t be considered for re-export under section 74 as requested by the importer, as the impugned goods became prohibited for import in the light of AQ authority s rejection report and hence deemed to have not been cleared. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) and the Commissioner(Appeals) modified the order of the original authority and allowed the benefit to the under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 for reexport of the goods as the governing factors under Section 74 for reexport of the goods have not been violated but Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs, Delhi [1997(92) ELT 367 (Tri.)] iii. Siemens Public Communication Networks Ltd. Vs. CC(Airport), Calcutta [2001(137) ELT 623 (Tri. Kolkata)] iv. SDS Ramcides Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC, Chennai-II [2018(359) ELT 239 (Tri. Chennai)] 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both sides and perusal of the material on record, I find that the original authority has confiscated the goods and allowed reexport of the goods subject to payment of redemption fine of ₹ 50,000/- under Section 125 and payment of penalty of ₹ 25000/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. Further I find that the Commissioner(Appeals) in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
