9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This appeal is against an order of the Commissioner of Customs, the operative part of which reads as under : "I determine the value of the second-hand Adast Dominant four colour offset printing machine 745P and Solna 425 four colour offset printing machine imported by M/s. Image Print 'O' Pack, New Delhi vide Bill of Entry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... puting the liability of the goods for confiscation. Their challenge in this appeal is limited to the question whether the quanta of redemption fine and penalty are reasonable or not. 2. Heard both sides. Ld. Counsel for the appellants has given a brief account of the relevant facts of the case. He submits that the same Commissioner has imposed lesser fine in respect of a similar second-hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne and penalty in the instant case require to be reduced proportionately. This argument has been contested by the DR, who seeks to distinguish the two cases by submitting that the machinery imported by Sai Shakti Enterprises was a consumer item (Photocopying machine) whereas, in the instant case, the imported machinery has considerably long residual life and is not a consumer item. Ld. DR has also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consider the element of Margin of Profit while determining redemption fine. Apparently the redemption fine was determined, in either of the cases, in an empirical manner without reference to the provisions of Section 125 of the Customs Act. The challenge by the parties in both the cases is against the manner of determination of redemption fine and penalty. In the case of M/s. Sai Shakti Enterprise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
