TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value declared in bill of entry and re-determined value under Section 28(4) of Customs Act, 1962 – Goods valued at ₹ 33.5 lakhs were directed to be confiscated and allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine – Taking into consideration fact that appellant had already paid sum and appellant undertook not to clear goods till disposal of appeal, it was appropriate to direct deposit fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/-? (2) Whether the Hon ble Tribunal was right in directing the appellant to pre-deposit an amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- when the appellant s goods worth ₹ 33,50,000/- are still lying under the control of the Revenue? (3) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the appellant did not make out a prima facie case for total waiver of pre- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 8,00,000/-. Further, the Authority imposed penalty equivalent to the differential duty on the importer and also a penalty of ₹ 5,00,000/- on the Partner of M/s. Innobiz Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Calicut, under Section 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by such order, the assessee went on appeal before the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant reiterated the submissions made before the Tribunal and contended that the appellant would not be in a position to deposit the amount as directed by the Tribunal owing to the financial hardship. That apart, learned counsel submitted that in respect of similar import, where the importer undertook not to clear the goods, the Tribunal had granted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
