Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 756 - AT - CustomsConfiscation of goods - the first appellate authority having held that the goods are liable for confiscation u/s 111(o) of the CA, 1962, has not confiscated the goods and has not imposed any penalty on the respondent - benefit of N/N. 16/2000-Cus dated 1st March 2000 - whether the appellant needs to be saddled with the confiscation of the goods imported by availing benefit of various notifications or otherwise; penalty to be imposed on appellant or otherwise? - Held that: - condition number 48 of notification that in non-compliance of full or part, differential duty needs to be discharged by the importer is only requirement and there is no condition or requirement that adjudicating authority should confiscate the goods u/s 111(o) of the CA, 1962, nor there is any clause for imposition of penalty on the importer. The respondent has discharged the entire Customs duty having not met the conditions of notifications; on being pointed out by the Departmental Officer, if that be so appellant has fulfilled the mandate of notification by paying duty on being demanded - adjudicating authority was correct in dropping the proceeding initiated by the show-cause notice for confiscation the goods and imposition of penalty - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|