9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ility for manufacturing Multi Function Machines, lenient view is taken on such import and imported used MFD are released on payment of redemption fine of 10% penalty of 5%. From the decision in ACCORD DIGITECH VERSUS C. C-BANGALORE [ 2020 (12) TMI 647 - CESTAT BANGALORE] passed by this Tribunal, it is clearly evident that the used Digital Multifunction Printing and Copying Machine were released on payment of redemption fine of 10% and penalty of 5% of the enhanced value of the imported goods - This was also followed by this Bench in the case of SR ENTERPRISES AND DIGITAL EXPRESS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE [ 2021 (9) TMI 1251 - CESTAT BANGALORE] wherein the redemption fine and penalty was 10% and 5% respectively. Thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als) vide impugned order dated 25.08.2021 held that goods are not liable for absolute confiscation and remanded the matter by allowing redemption of goods on payment of appropriate customs duties, redemption fine and penalty. 3. Learned A.R. for the Revenue reiterated finding in order in original, the grounds of appeal and also submitted that the impugned order is issued by remanding the matter to original authority on payment of appropriate customs duties, redemption fine and penalty as affirmed by importer/Respondent during hearing. Since there is no direction to quantify fine and penalty direction/order in the impugned order cannot be implemented. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the import of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... very same goods against Bill of Entry No. 4620026 dated 30.12.2017 and vide Final order No. 21308- 21309/2019 dated 20.12.2019, Tribunal remanded the matter for denovo adjudication directing adjudication authority to find out the market value of the goods and to quantify the redemption fine and penalty, aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue filed the appeal before Hon ble High Court of Karnataka and only on dismissal of the departmental appeal, Adjudication Authority considered the issue for denovo adjudication. Though this Tribunal had issued specific direction to find out the market value of the goods, the Adjudication Authority issued an order imposing redemption fine equivalent to the value of the goods on the ground that the market ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty to 10% and 5% of the assessable value. 7. I have gone through the facts and submissions made by the Learned AR and the counsel for the Respondent. The Original Authority had re-determined the assessable value of 128 units of used Digital Multifunction Printing and Copying Machine (MFDs) as Rs. 21,98,071/-. It is also held that goods are liable for absolute confiscation and imposed penalty equivalent to the value of imported goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order had held that the goods are not liable for absolute confiscation but only issued an order for release of goods on payment of duty, redemption fine and penalty as affirmed by the respondent. Both the Revenue and the Respondent are challenging the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
