TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mis-declared goods failed. Therefore, the inference that may be drawn is that the exporter appellant apprehending that the goods may be confiscated, choose to avail the option of redemption fine and took back the goods. In such circumstance, imposition of penalty of ₹ 3,00,000/- does not appear to be unreasonable. Therefore, the appeal of the exporter is dismissed. - Decided against the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set was filed without the DEPB claim and the second set was filed to make draw back claim. In para 32 of the order, the fact of such filing appears. While the exporter blames the CHA and G Card holder, they submit that they acted under instruction of exporter to make above commitment. 2. On the aforesaid factual background, exporters submission is that when the goods were not meant for expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t may be drawn is that the exporter appellant apprehending that the goods may be confiscated, choose to avail the option of redemption fine and took back the goods. In such circumstance, imposition of penalty of ₹ 3,00,000/- does not appear to be unreasonable. Therefore, the appeal of the exporter is dismissed. 5. So far as the CHA is concerned, he does not appear to be innocent. He acted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
