Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 975 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (9) TMI 975 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - 2015 (324) E.L.T. 280 (Mad.) - Confiscation of goods - Imposition of penalty - Violation of EXIM Policy - Held that:- There is no bar on the adjudicating authority, in a de-novo proceedings, to determine the quantum of fine or penalty. The fine and penalty imposed has been set aside and the matter is live for re- adjudication. Hence earlier order imposing fine or penalty does not have any relevance. The adjudicating authority, at its discretion, may impose .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2012 , M. P. (MD) No. 1 of 2012 - Dated:- 2-9-2015 - R. Sudhakar And V. M. Velumani, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. S. Renganathan For the Respondents : Mr. R. Aravindan JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. Sudhakar,J) The premises of the appellant firm was inspected by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, during which it was found that out of 18 second hand printing machines imported vide different Bills of Entry, for a value of ₹ 40,16,557/- (CIF), only two machines were .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

old by the party in the local market for ₹ 40,81,000/- under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962. I, however, give an option to the party to redeem the same on payment of fine of ₹ 12,75,000/ (Rupees twelve lakhs seventy five thousand only) under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2.I impose the penalty of ₹ 1.5 (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand only) on M/s.Mehta Fine Arts, Sivakasi under Section112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962" 2. Challenging the same, the appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntry through Tuticorin port and sold to various parties by M/s.Mehta Fine Arts, Sivakasi are liable to confiscation under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962. (ii) I impose a penalty of ₹ 4,50,000/0 (Rupees Four Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) on the importer under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) I order that the amount of ₹ 75,000/- paid as pre deposit may be adjusted against the dues as above." Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred an appeal before 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

ng for the appellants pleads for reduction in penalty amounts We find that though in these cases the goods were liable for confiscation, no redemption fine has been imposed as the machines were not available. Hence, the penalty of 10% imposed in respect of the impugned machines is quite reasonable and the same does not require any reduction. Consequently, all the three appeals are rejected." 3. Challenging the same, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. On 07.06.2012, while a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version