Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Rajat Industries Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi

2015 (12) TMI 858 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

100% EOU - Mis-Declaration of excess quantity of export goods to meet export obligation - Confiscation of goods - Gutkha under the brand name of 'kolhapuri'. - Imposition of redemption fine - Held that:- It is a fact on record that on physical verification, there was shortage of quantity of export goods to the tune of around 30%. If the goods were not checked at the time of export, the appellant could have shown the quantity of export goods as shown in the shipping bill as correct and had availe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s are liable for confiscation. In the impugned order, the redemption fine of ₹ 12 lakh has been imposed on the appellant whereas the quantity in number found short is 15,26,400 pouches, which I find is appropriate. Therefore, redemption fine of ₹ 12 lakh imposed on the appellant is confirmed - Appeal disposed of. - Customs Appeal No. 50731 of 2015-Cus(SM) - Final Order No. A/52708/2015-Cus (SM), - Dated:- 26-8-2015 - Ashok Jindal, Member (J) For the Appellant : Shri R S Yadav, Consul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ariation in the quantity shown in the packing list and physical quantity. Therefore, matter was referred to Special Investigation and Intelligence Branch for 100% check. On 100% check, it was found that physical quantity of gutkha is 41,97,600 pouches. There is short quantity of 15,26,400 pouches. Therefore, the allegation of mis-declaration was alleged against the appellant and for confiscation of the goods. Various statements of the appellant's representative were recorded. Thereafter, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mits that the appellants have no intention to mis-declare the quantity of goods and the appellant has already foregone the rebate claim on the said exported goods and there was no allegation against /the appellant that they have intentionally mis-declared the quantity of export goods. In these circumstances, the goods are not liable for confiscation, consequently imposition of penalties and redemption fine are not sustainable. 4. On the other hand, learned AR submits that on physical verificatio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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