9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 812X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es including the Hon ble Supreme Court in the matter of Commissioner of Customs Vs. M/s Atul Automation Pvt. Ltd. 2019 (1) TMI 1324 - SUPREME COURT and Digital Express 2020 (10) TMI 184 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT . In the absence of any evidence regarding margin of profit, it is settled that, such goods can be allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine of 10% of enhanced value and penalty of 15% of the enhanced value. Thus, there is no infirmity in the order of allowing release of goods subject to payment of fine and penalty as held by Appellate authority. It was not the case of Commissioner (appeals) that goods in the case were not liable for confiscation, since they are imported in violations of various non-tariff provisions of Cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its of Used Digital Multifunctional Printers/Devices with accessories (Second Hand) vide Bill of Entry No.3504084 dated 05.10.2017. The Respondent classified the imported goods under CTH 84433100 and declared value of Rs.17,97,192/-. Later, the Chartered Engineer enhanced the value to Rs.29,56,734/- which was accepted by the Respondent. 2. The adjudicating authority issued Order-in-Original No.9/2020, dated 09.01.2020 whereby the goods were ordered for absolute confiscation under section 111(d) and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 and also imposed penalty of Rs. 37,15,953/- under section 112 (a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. Similarly, adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 10/2020 dated 16.01.2020 held that goods are liable for ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 24.01.2019 -2019(365) ELT 465 (SC). c. Final Order No.21308-21309/2019 dated 20.12.2019 in M/s. S.R. Enterprises M/s. Digital Express. Maintained by Hon ble High Court of Karnataka, in CC Vs. Digital Express and S. R. Enterprise 2021 (375) 643 (Kar) whereby the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed. d. M/s. M G Copiers Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore vide Final Order No. 20786/2023 dated 09.08.2023. e. M/s. J J Graphics Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore vide Final Order No. 20788/2023 dated 09.08.2023. f. M/s. Skylark Office Machine Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore vide Final Order No. 20789/2023 dated 09.08.2023. g. Print Solutions Vs. CC, vide Final Order dt.20790/2023 dated 09.8.2023. h. Accord Digitech Vs. CC, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aving regard to Section 3(3) of the Foreign Trade Act read with Section 18A of the said Act, Section 125 of the Act will become relevant. Since MFDs are not a prohibited item of import but restricted item of import, discretion under Section 125 of the Act could be exercised in the matter of redemption of the restricted goods imported with authority for determination of the redemption fine and penalty. In that case, the Hon ble Supreme Court held that respondents therein were entitled to redemption of the consignment on payment of the market price at the reassessed value by the Customs Authority with fine under Section 112(a) of the Act. 7. As per the above decisions/judgments, even if such goods are imported in violation of ibid provisions, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
