Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

SURANA INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

2015 (6) TMI 860 - SUPREME COURT

Levy of penalty and redemption fine - Classification of goods - Non-alloy melting scrap or Non-alloy steel re-rollable scrap - Held that:- We find that this is an old appeal of 2003 and the appellant before us is a small scale industry on whom penalt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

maintaining the order of the learned technical Member and the learned third Member. This is also in the fitness of things considering that the National Metallurgical Laboratory had differed from the other expert opinions and therefore there were two .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Appellant. Shri Yashank Adhyaru, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Binu Tamta, Arijit Prasad and B. Krishna Prasad, Advocates, for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant before us has brought to our notice that there is a conflict of opinion amongst the Members of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ew of the technical expert opinion produced by the appellant that the items in question are non-alloy melting scrap and not non-alloy steel re-rollable scrap. The learned Judicial Member further held that on a perusal of three certificates of experts .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vidual opinions furnished and of the certificate of the Chartered Engineer dated 22-10-2002 which was produced much later. 2. In so holding, the learned technical Member dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner herein. Finally, he observed: .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0/- which comes to 7.63% which cannot be considered as excessive and I confirm the same. The appellants have been imposed a penalty of ₹ 6,00,000/- which is 2.54% of the goods valued at ₹ 2,36,02,104/-, which cannot be considered as exces .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f difference were referred to a third Member. The third learned Member agreed with the decision taken by the learned technical Member and thus held that the matter would not have to be remanded for de novo consideration and dismissed the appeal. This .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version