9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt None for the Respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair Issue involved in the present case is whether the adjudicating authority is right by not imposing the redemption fine on the ground that the goods were not available for confiscation. 2. Shri Manoj Kumar, AC, learned AR appearing on behalf of the appellant-Revenue submits that since the case of the Department is that the appellant has violated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Revenue's contention that since the appellant had executed Bond under the Advance License Scheme, the goods shall be treated as released under Bond, therefore, the redemption fine could have been imposed, we find that the Bond was executed exclusively for compliance of the condition of Exemption Notification No. 149/95-Cus. Bond was not executed for provisional release of the goods. It is undisp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich would entitle the customs authorities to confiscate the said goods, then the mere fact that the goods were released on the bond being executed, would not take away the power of the customs authorities to levy redemption fine." 6. From the above judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is clear that the goods were seized and subsequently released provisionally on an application made by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
