9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of Entry on the basis of the import documents such as commercial invoice, packing list etc. They have also claimed the correct classification of the imported goods. Claiming of wrong exemption notification is not a condition precedent for invocation of clause (m) in Section 111 ibid, for confiscation of the goods. This Tribunal, in an identical matter, in the case of M/S. SIRTHAI SUPERWARE INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, NHAVA SHEVA-III [ 2019 (10) TMI 460 - CESTAT MUMBAI] has set aside confiscation of goods and also imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) ibid, holding ' From plain reading of the said clauses of Section 111, we do not find that these sub clauses, are applicable to cases where the classification of claim of ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods declared therein as SVPS Chillers. The appellants had classified the said goods under CTH 84198940 and claimed the benefit of Notification No.21/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012. The Bill of Entry filed by the appellants was selfassessed in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962. On verification of the goods by the Shed Staff of the Customs department, it was observed that the benefit of notification dated 17.03.2012 claimed by the appellants should not be available to them, in view of the fact that the exemption provided therein is available only to the packaged commodities meant for retail sale, as per the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011. On the basis of such understanding, the Bill of Entry was re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original authority had not invoked the provisions of Section 111(o) ibid, which was invoked by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for the first time, while passing the impugned order dated 07.07.2014. In this context, he submitted that since the re-assessment order was passed by the proper officer, ordering confiscation of goods under Section 111(m) ibid, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is not competent to invoke the provisions contained in Section 111(o) ibid, while entertaining the appeal filed in terms of Section 128 ibid. To support his stand that the goods are not liable for confiscation and penalty cannot be imposed on the appellants, Learned Consultant has relied upon the following orders passed by the Tribunal: (i) J.K. Indu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad as follows: (m) any goods which do not correspond in respect of value or in any other particular with the entry made under this Act or in the case of baggage with the declaration made under section 77 in respect thereof, or in the case of goods under transhipment, with the declaration for transhipment referred to in the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 54; (o) any goods exempted, subject to any condition, from duty or any prohibition in respect of the import thereof under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, in respect of which the condition is not observed unless the non-observance of the condition was sanctioned by the proper officer; 4.9 From plain reading of the said clauses of Section 111, we do not find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
