9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (7) TMI 139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - These three appeals are made against the same order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (P), Mumbai they are therefore being disposed of vide this single order. 2.We have heard Shri S.N. Kantawala for the appellants and Shri Virag Gupta for the Revenue. 3.M/s. Delux Carpet Co. were in possession of an Import-Export Pass Book bearing Sr. No. 0011261 issued on 27-2- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere cleared and seeking confiscation of the goods lying in the docks in terms of Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 111(d) of the said Act. Although the offending goods were imported during the period December, 1989 to July, 1990, in the show cause notice invoking the provisions of Section 20 of the said Act, the proviso thereof was not referred to which permitted notice to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t this order. 6.Shri S.N. Kantawala relies upon the following judgments. (1) Dawn Fireworks Factory & Ors. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [1999 (31) RLT 104 (CEGAT)] (2) Jai Mata Plywood Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [1999 (32) RLT 63 (CEGAT)] 7.The ratio of the two judgments is that where the first show cause notice did not invoke the extended period, the second show caus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orders of confirmation of demand made in the impugned order do not survive. 8.As regards the confiscation of the goods we find the proposals had been made only in the first cited show cause notice. The reason for confiscation as shown in Paragraph 7 of the said notice was that these goods would also have been sold by M/s. Delux Carpet Co. in the unlawful manner if they had not already been seize ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
