2009 (12) TMI 776

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ecords. In the impugned order, the learned Commissioner of Customs (Imports) Mumbai, confiscated the chassis of a truck valued at Rs. 26,99,046/- covered by bill of entry No. 866304 dated 15-10-2008, under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act. The option was given to the importer (appellant) to redeem the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 2.00 lakhs subject to the condition that the goods be re-exporte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... icle was found liable for confiscation and the importer liable for penalty. 2. According to the appellant, they were engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicles as evidenced by the registration certificate and also had Research and Development (R & D) facility. It is also submitted that any registration of R&D facility was not one of the conditions specified under the licensing notes. It is also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cepting the order of confiscation and the option for redemption of the goods against payment of fine determined by the Commissioner. The option for redemption of the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 2.00 lakhs was subject to the condition that the goods be re-exported within 30 days from the date of such redemption. It was this condition which was voluntarily complied with by the appellant. In the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X