TMI Blog1995 (6) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal relating to the damaged goods. The delay in filing the appeals is condoned. 2. The learned Sr. Counsel has pleaded that in the above appeals, the appellant had been given the option to clear the goods and he is therefore, not contesting the appeals on merits. Inasmuch as the appeals are not contested on merits, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 3. The issue, therefore, survives for consideration is regarding the absolute confiscation of the car u/s 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The learned Counsel briefly narrating the facts of the case has pleaded that the appellant had imported the car on 26-10-1989 under a Carnet which was valid upto 21-10-1990. He pleaded that the appellant could normally retain the car in India under T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnestness he pursued the matter for extension with the authorities. He pleaded that no one informed him that he could not retain the car beyond six months and he requested for extension of period of retention. He pleaded that the appellant inadvertently violated the conditions of import under carnet and kept the car with him until 21-10-1990 when the car was given under the constructive possession by surrendering of the keys of the car to the authorities and garaged at the premises of Shri Ramachandran. However, it is a matter of record that the appellant was diligent in pursuing the matter of extension and the learned lower authority also in his order has taken note of the bona fides of the appellant and has refrained from levying any pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion as requested by him was admittedly not granted. He pleaded so far as the appreciation of the facts is concerned, the learned SDR leaves it to the Bench. There may be a question regarding the levy of some duty in case the option for re-export is granted which may be left open for consideration by the authorities below. 5. We observe that confiscability of the car is not contested. We, therefore, uphold the confiscation of the car. The plea for consideration is only in regard to option for re-export of the car on payment of a suitable redemption fine. As pleaded by the learned Sr. Counsel and as borne out from the records which have been shown to us by the learned SDR, the appellant had been diligent in pursuing his request for furthe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
