9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f differential duty upheld – redemption fine and penalties reduced. - C/639/2002-Mum - A/631/2008-WZB/C-II/(CSTB), - Dated:- 14-11-2008 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and K.K. Agarwal, Member (T) None, for the Appellant. Dr. Y.D. Banga, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : K.K. Agarwal, Member (T)]. - This appeal is against the Commissioner's order confiscating nine machines under Sections 111(d) and (o) of the Customs Act, 1962 with option to redeem on payment of fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, demanding differential duty of Rs. 2,99,464/- on three out of nine machines which were imported after 1-3-87 and imposition of penalty of Rs.1 lakh on the appellants under Sec.112 of the Act. 2. There is no representation for the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se specified above (export) and in the event of importer's failure to comply with the aforesaid condition, he shall be liable to pay an amount equal to the difference between the duty leviable on the imported machines but for the exemption. It is the appellants contention that the goods have been used by him for the purpose of export, in addition to the domestic sales and as per his interpretation, the Notification does not require exclusive use for exports and use for domestic consumption is also permissible. In view of the same, these machines also could not have been confiscated nor differential duty be demanded. 4. Ld. DR, however, submits that even though prior to 1987 there was no requirement of filing a declaration and use for pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, for which purpose an undertaking was also required to be filed, it has to be considered that the machines could not have been used for any purpose other than export. Since the appellant himself is admitting that the machines were not used exclusively for the purpose of export, there has been a violation of condition of Notification which has rendered the goods liable for confiscation under Sec.111(o) and differential duty is required to be paid as per terms of Notification itself. In view of this, we uphold the confiscation of three machines and demand of differential duty amounting to Rs. 2,88,464/-. However, the redemption fine and penalty imposed are required to be reduced proportionately as we nave set aside the confiscation of six m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
