9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 21307, Dubai, UAE, on receipt of the said car. The Appellant filed Bill of Entry No. 448378, dated 30-3-2004 for clearance of the said car claiming Public Notice No. 3(RE-2000)/1997-2002, dated 31-3-2000. The assessable value of the car was computed by the Group VB, Customs as Rs. 8,81,169/-. 4. However, the car in question was seized. It was alleged that the B/L dated 25-1-2004 was predated deliberately by the Appellant to circumvent the condition of one year possession notified vide Notification No. 29 (RE-2004) 2002-2007 w.e.f. 28-1-2004. The relevant portion is produced below : - "Individuals coming to India for permanent settlement after two years continuous stay abroad provided the car have been in the possession of the individu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 19-1-2004 and that the House Bill of Lading by M/s. Abeer Cargo Est. was issued on 25-1-2004. (b) the absolute confiscation of the seized car was not sustainable in view of the Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. (c) in identical circumstances, the cars were being released on payment of redemption fine and the Order suffered on the vice of discrimination. 7. The ld. Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) gave a personal hearing and was apprised of the fact that goods were not notified as prohibited under Section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962. The absolute confiscation was set aside. The Commissioner was further cognizant of huge demurrage and detention charges having been suffered by the appellant and deemed it fit to tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrage and detention charges and also due to deterioration of condition of vehicle on account of its stationary condition. Considering the totality of circumstances, including that the car was for personal use, there is no scope for involvement of principles of margin of profit, particularly when the condition of the vehicle has deteriorated on account of its confiscation. It was further submitted that the decision in the "Garg Woolen Mills (P) Ltd." - 1998 (104) E.L.T. 306 (S.C.) is not applicable in the facts of the present case and for being related to prohibited goods. (iv) The reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the matter of "C.C. v. Marmo Classic" reported in 2003 (156) E.L.T. 14 (Bom.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date and it is a clear case of ITC violation. The Public Notice No. 3 (RE-2000) dated 31-3-2000 cannot be claimed by the appellant. Therefore, confiscation is upheld. Since the car in question was purchased for his own use and imported at the time of permanent return to India, he cannot be attributed with any motive of profit making. It is not controverted by the DR either. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the ends of justice would meet by reducing redemption fine to Rs. 25,000/- and the amount of penalty to Rs. 5,000/- as the appellant has already suffered on account of detention, demurrage and deterioration of the car. I order the release of the car forthwith on deposit of the aforesaid amount along with the applicable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
