9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for stay came up for hearing it was agreed by both sides that the appeal itself can be disposed of. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal. 2. The appellant is aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (ICD), Tughlakabad, New Delhi dated 2-5-2002. The Shipping Bill Nos. 18158 and 18159, dated 27-7-99 were filed by the appellant for export of 45,000/- pairs each of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ket enquiry was correct and accordingly re-fixed the value of the goods. Apart from reducing the value of the goods for DEPB purpose and restricting the benefit of DEPB a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs was imposed under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. The party filed an appeal before this Tribunal. By Order dated 12-7-2000 this Tribunal allowed the appeal and remanded the matter for fresh conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the market enquiry report was supplied to the exporter under letter dated 18-12-2001 and notice for personal hearing on 22-11-2001, 22-2-2002 and 8-4-2002 were sent to the party but they failed to appear in person or make any written submission. After referring to the market enquiry report the Commissioner took the view that since no challenge is made by the appellant regarding market enquiry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Commissioner and that the copy of the market enquiry report had been sent to the party under letter dated 18-12-2001. The case put forward by the appellant is rather curious. Even in the earlier appeal before this Tribunal they were taking the contention that the notice for hearing is not being received by them. At the same time it is admitted that they have received the copy of the order. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
