9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. ORDER This appeal is filed by the Revenue. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent filed a Bill of Entry under EPCG Scheme for the clearance of 400 Sq. Ft. of polished marble slabs of size 72"x 39"x 3/4" at concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 97/2004-Cus., dated 10-9-2004. As per the EPCG licence, the respondent was allowed to import polished marble slab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emption fine and penalties were also imposed. The said order was challenged by the respondent before the Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the adjudication order and allowed the appeal. Aggrieved from the said order. Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The ld. DR submitted that in this case the respondent has mis-declared the goods such as specification, value and quantity. Mor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent to import the said size of marble under the guise of the order placed by them. There is no mala fide intention of the respondent to import such goods. Moreover, the appellants have discharged their duty liability of the excess quantity and the value as per invoice. Hence, the imposition of redemption fine and penalty is not sustainable as there is no mis-declaration with deliberate intent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time of import, the respondents were not having the licence under EPCG Scheme from DGFT of the quantity imported is not sustainable as we find that the respondent has got amended the licence to that extent. Moreover, in the adjudication proceedings, nowhere it is coming out that the respondent has mis-declared the description, specification/quantity of the goods with mala fide intention. In th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
