TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee - C/1113/2004-Mum to C/1115/2004-Mum. - - - Dated:- 13-7-2011 - Mr. M.V.Ravindran, Mr. Sahab Singh, JJ. Appearance: Shri Mihir Deshmukh Advocate for appellant Shri V.K. Singh, SDR Authorized Representative for respondent Per : M.V. Ravindran These three appeals are directed against the Order-in-Original No.05/2004 dated 20.08.2004. Since the issue involved in all these three appeals are arising out of the very same order-in-original, they are being disposed of by the common order. 2. The relevant facts arise for consideration are that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence intercepted 4 consignments of the appellant-company herein which were awaiting shipment. On examination of said containers it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re-B to the Show Cause Notice I order that the same are liable to confiscation under Section 113(d) and 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 as they suffered from the same kind of mis-declaration at the time of export. However, all these goods had been exported and were not recalled to India at the request of the exporter. Since, the goods are not available for confiscation I impose a fine of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only) on M/s. Varun Continental Limited on this account. (iii) The FOB value in respect of 10 export consignments as detailed in Annexure-C to C-10 are finally determined at Rs.1,35,29,137/- as the said value have already been accepted by the exporter and goods were allowed to be exported after the exporter revised the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er 52 shipping bills the goods were already exported and hence they were not available for confiscation and the redemption fine imposed on these goods needs to be set aside. He seeks leniency in the imposition of redemption fine and penalties. 4. The learned SDR after taking us through the order-in-original submits that the adjudicating authority has correctly passed the order. On a specific query from the Bench, as regards the leniency pleaded by the appellants, he reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority and leaves it to the Bench. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. 6. It is seen from the records that the appellant had exported the consignment as per shipping b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tained by the authorities. Since the goods, which were declared were only found to be short and there is no other misdeclaration, regards the description, rate per unit etc., we are of the view that the redemption fine/fines imposed by the adjudicating authority needs to be modified which in our considered view should be as under:- 1] As regards 10 shipping bills as detailed in Annexure -A-1 to A-10 of the show-cause notice, we reduce the redemption fine imposed by the adjudicating authority from Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) to Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees eight lakhs only); 2] As regards the goods covered under 52 shipping bills as detailed in Annexure 'B' to the show-cause notice, we reduce the redemption fine from Rs.50,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
