Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1988 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1988 (12) TMI 220 - AT - Customs

Issues:
1. Confiscation of goods recovered from residential premises.
2. Adjudication by Dy. Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur.
3. Appeal before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi.
4. Allegations in the show cause notice.
5. Violation of Import (Control) Order and Customs Act provisions.
6. Confiscation and redemption of goods.
7. Re-verification of baggage receipt for National VCR.

1. Confiscation of Goods:
The appellant's residential premises were searched, leading to the recovery of various goods. The Dy. Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur, confiscated the goods, alleging that certain baggage receipts were procured subsequently. A penalty was imposed along with absolute confiscation.

2. Adjudication by Dy. Collector:
The Dy. Collector found discrepancies in the baggage receipts and imposed a penalty, citing lack of authenticity in the receipts produced by the appellant. The confiscation was upheld due to perceived violations.

3. Appeal before Collector of Customs (Appeals):
On appeal, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) allowed redemption of some goods, stating that the T.V. and Radio Cassette Recorder were duty paid and could be redeemed on payment. The National VCR confiscation was upheld due to discrepancies in the baggage receipt.

4. Allegations in Show Cause Notice:
The show cause notice invoked contraventions of Import (Control) Order and Customs Act provisions but did not mention the violation of post-importation conditions, leading to arguments about the scope of allegations.

5. Violation of Import Order and Customs Act:
The appellant argued against the application of certain Customs Act provisions due to the goods being for personal use and found in residential premises. The advocate contended that the goods were not confiscable under the mentioned sections.

6. Confiscation and Redemption:
The Tribunal considered the confiscation of goods in light of the arguments presented. While acknowledging the duty payment for some items, a reduced redemption fine was ordered for minor offenses. The National VCR's status was subject to re-verification of the baggage receipt.

7. Re-verification of Baggage Receipt:
The Tribunal directed re-adjudication of the National VCR case, emphasizing the need for re-verification of the baggage receipt to ensure a fair decision. The appellant was to be provided with necessary documents for further submissions, with a timeline set for the adjudication process.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates