Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (12) TMI 197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... challenged before the Tribunal. In any event, we are of the view that a workable solution needs to be worked out as the goods have been imported in September 2020 and still lying in the Customs area. It may be true that the appeal as against the order of Commissioner of Customs was filed by the department only on 29th October 2021 but the filing of the said appeal was very well within the period of limitation and for such reason the first respondent cannot compel for execution of the order passed by the Commissioner that too by filing the writ petition well within the period of limitation prescribed for filing an appeal to the Tribunal by aggrieved person against the order of the adjudicating authority. Be that as it may, now the goods hav .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... atory in terms of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) dated 11th August 2021. The first respondent also prayed for a consequential relief for directing the department to enquire and investigate on the retest sample of the goods as the first respondent alleged that when the sample was initially drawn they were swapped. Further consequential direction was sought for by the first respondent to reimburse the warehousing charges and container rent suffered on the goods. The first respondent imported a consignment of Fabric vide Bill of Entry dated 5th September 2020. The product which was imported was stated to be hundred per cent Polyester Knitted Fabric, the country of origin of the goods was declared as China. On 22nd Sep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 377; 18,72,916/- under provisions of Section 111 (f) and Section 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, I give an option to the importer to redeem the goods covered under Bills of Entry No. 8819186 dated 15.09.2020 on payment of Redemption Fine of ₹ 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) under section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. (v) I impose a penalty of ₹ 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousands only) on M/s R.K. Impex Co. under provisions of Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 for their acts of omission and commission. The appellant department have preferred an appeal to the CESTAT (the Tribunal) stated to be filed on 29th October, 2021. Soon after the order was passed by the Commissioner, the fir .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned Counsel has also relied upon the decision in the case of HLG TRADING VS.COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI-II reported in 2018(18) G.S.T.L. 430 (Madras) in support of the submission that first respondent is entitled for detention certificate and consequential waiver of the demurrages and other charges. Aggrieved by the same the revenue is before us by way of this appeal. We have elaborately heard Mr. Maity, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sudhir Mehta, learned Counsel for the respondent and carefully considered the materials placed before us. The first respondent/writ petitioner has filed a cross-objection as against that portion of the relief which was not granted to the first respondent by learned Writ Court namely the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... presence of the first respondent/importer and in accordance with the relevant procedure and send the samples for testing to the accredited laboratory in Kolkata and the charges be payable by the first respondent. It is made clear that drawal of the samples and sending the same for testing to the laboratory shall be without prejudice to the rights and contention of the appellant in appeal which was filed by the department before the Tribunal challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs dated 11th August, 2021. ii) We are informed that the department has agreed that the first respondent can warehouse the goods but the same could not be complied with because there is a huge demand of detention charges. We find that there is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates