1991 (4) TMI 155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5-1990 was issued to M/s. Chinoy and Chablani Co., Calcutta, the respondents herein. They were also heard in person on 10-4-1991 when Shri B.T. Shah and Shri B.K. Shah of M/s. Bogilal Mehta Co. appeared. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a penalty of Rs. 44,342/- was imposed on the respondents for short-landing of 33 reels of newsprint manifested against line No. 28 Rotation N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s Section 12(1) of the Act whereas when it comes to assessment or quantification of the amount payable Sections 14 and 15 come into play. Therefore, one will have to look to Section 12 only for the purpose of determining the duty chargeable. As provided in the section, duties of customs are levied at such rates as may be specified under the Tariff Act, Computation of duty chargeable qua sub-clause .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xemptions are envisaged imports would not have served the purposes for which exemptions are envisaged. This also strengthens the conclusion reached in preceding para. Section 116 ibid imposes a strict liability on the person in charge of the conveyance. 5. In view of the aforesaid discussions Government set-aside the impugned order-in-appeal No. 2208/89 dated 14-12-1989 and restore the order-in- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X