9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, it was found to contain Saffron, Unicore Rhodium Black, Titan Wrist watches, Mobile Phones, assorted perfumes, Imitation stones and bags. Since, the said goods were in commercial quantity and did not appear to be a bona fide baggage, the said goods were placed under seizure. The passenger in his statement dated 20-6-2009 admitted the offence and showed his readiness to pay duty on seized goods or re-shipment of the said goods. He also waived issuance of SCN. The adjudicating authority vide O-I-O No. 7/Addl.Commr/ SVPIA/O&A/2009, dated 25-9-2009, determined total value of seized goods as Rs. 8,39,760/- (CIF) and Rs. 10,91,691/- (LMV); ordered confiscation of seized goods u/s 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962; imposed penalty of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CC, Kolkata v. Grand Prime Ltd. [2003 (155) E.L.T. 417 (S.C.)] 4.2 The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in case of CC, Kolkata v. M/s. Grand Prime Ltd. reported in 2003 (155) E.L.T. 417 (S.C.) held, in para 18, that : "the import of the consignments in question being contrary to law, the goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. The order of confiscation of goods passed by the Commissioner of Customs is held to be in accordance with law. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Tribunal in permitting re-export of the goods. Further, the Tribunal in its impugned order has waived the penalties imposed by the Commissioner on Respondents 3 to 7. This part of the Order of Tribunal is without any reasons. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Law was very clear on the subject. That in cases of baggage the authority to be appeal is Revisional authority and by such undue delay it has resulted in miscarriage of Justice and loss to my client due to deterioration in the value and quality. 5.2 It is to be rejected as no question of law is involved as in precedent cases the Revisional authority has given Reshipment my client craves to refer and rely upon, such orders as of goods are neither restricted nor prohibited, after confiscation the person becomes owner and when option is given. It is open to him to exercise the redemption option. 6. Personal hearing scheduled in the case on 11-3-2011, 7-4-2011 & 11-5-2011 was not attended by anybody for and on behalf of the applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds valuing 839670/- (CIF Value) (Rs. 1091691/- LMV) were found. The passenger had grossly mis-declared the goods with intention to evade duty and smuggle the goods into India. As per the provision of Section 80 of Customs Act, 1962 when the baggage of the passenger contains article which is dutiable or prohibited and in respect of which the declaration is made under Section 77, the proper officer on request of passenger detain such article for the purpose of being returned to him on his leaving India. Since passenger neither made true declaration nor requested for detention of goods for re-export, before customs at the time of his arrival at Airport. So the re-export of said goods cannot be allowed under Section 80 of Customs Act. 10.&emsp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
