2000 (8) TMI 141

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... goods are not available for confiscation, as these have already been exported against an ETC Bond and Bank guarantee, I impose a penalty of Rs. 30 lakh (Thirty lakhs only), in lieu of confiscation, under the provisions of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. I also impose a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000.00 (Rupees five lakhs only) under Section 114 ibid, for the acts and omissions on the part of the noticees. The aforesaid amounts of Rs. 30,00,000.00 (thirty lakhs only) should be realised forthwith by enforcing the ETC Bond and the Bank guarantee executed by the Noticees. I also order that the noticees claim for export fulfilment obligation, be denied, as the exported products were not stainless steel utensils of AISI-304 grade but goods .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... totally vague as the same does not mention the reasoning for arriving at the conclusion that the samples did not conform to chemical requirement of AISI-304. He, further, submits that the test report given by National Test House, Mumbai is only tested against 5 parameters whereas for testing stainless steel of AISI-304 grade 7 parameters are required to be taken into consideration. The contention of the appellants is that National Test House has not tested the percentage of sulphur and phosphorus. Ld. Counsel submits that as these test reports were vague, immediately on receipt of show cause notice, the appellants on 17-9-1996 requested the Commissioner of Customs for re-testing of the samples by the Chief Chemist. Ld. Counsel submits that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s are to the fact that sample is an article of utencil made of non-metallic stainless steel not conformed to chemical requirement of AISI-304 and no reasoning was given. 9.In respect of samples examined by the National Test House, Mumbai, the contention of the appellants is that these reports were examined in respect of 5 parameters, whereas for testing of stainless steel of AISI-304 grade, 7 parameters are required to be taken into consideration as per IS-5522 of 1992 of Bureau of Indian Standard pertaining to specifications of stainless steel sheets and utencils. The National Test House has not given any report in respect of parameters and percentage of sulpher and phosphorus. 10.We find that the Commissioner of Customs, in the impugn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X