9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stay of the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), Mumbai and the appeals were filed by the above appellants. 2. In the impugned order, the Commissioner redetermined the value of the imported goods, confirmed a demand of Rs. 1,57,097.80 on the excess quantity found in the consignment, confiscated the excess quantity of 80378.851. mtrs. under Section 111(d), 111(m) and 111(l) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve fabrics of different widths. The consignment was examined in detail. As against the declared width of 44² and 58², the rolls were found to be having the width of 44² to 71². On physical inventorisation of all the goods as above, the position appeared as under : Sr. No. Width decl. No. of rolls Length declared in mtrs/sq. mtrs. Actual length in mtrs/sq. mtrs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this examination, a show cause notice was issued asking the appellants as to why the goods in question should not be confiscate; why penalties should not be imposed and why the value declared should not be enhanced. This show cause notice was answerable to the Commissioner of Customs (Export Promotion) having his office at 2nd floor, New Custom House, Mumbai. The case was however adjudicated by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned order in that case as it was passed without the jurisdiction and remanded the case back for fresh adjudication by a competent authority who has jurisdiction. The learned advocate relied on this decision and requested that the pre-deposit may be dispensed with and the main appeal heard. 6. Heard both sides. 7. We observe that the show cause notice in this case was made answerable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
