TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... price of US $ 40/ sq.mt. (FOB) valued at Rs. 24 lakhs. (b) As per the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), Notification No. 26/05 dated 2-9-2005, import of Marble slabs are restricted if the CIF value is less than US $ 2700 per cubic meter, which works out US $ 5 for 2 cm thickness marble slabs. The declared CIF value for the present consignment worked out to US $ 43 per sq.mt. for 2 cm thickness marble slabs. As the declared CIF value was less than the minimum CIF value required for the goods to be freely importable under the Foreign Trade Policy, goods appeared to be liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the respondents liable for penalty under Section 112 ibid. (c) The respondents, vide wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he was unable to arrive at the conclusion that the respondents were the person concerned with the offence and desisted from imposing any penalty on him. (f) The Commissioner, therefore, ordered confiscation of the goods imported vide Bill of Entry No. 910511 dated 25-9-2006 valued at Rs. 24 lakhs under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 but permitted to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 2,50,000/- under Section 125 of the Act. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. I find that the Commissioner had confiscated the impugned goods under Section 111(d) Customs Act, 1962, and allowed redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 2,50,000/- under Section 125 of the Act, but refrained from imposing any penalty under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Officer under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act against the assessee for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67; (ii) Comex Co. v. Collector of Customs, Madras, 1997 (96) E.L.T. 526 (Mad.) wherein it was held by the Hon'ble High Court that no mens rea was ever required as a condition precedent for levying a personal penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962; (iii) CCE, Vapi v. Modison Ltd., 2006 (203) E.L.T. 521 wherein the Larger Bench of the Tribunal has held that mens rea is not an essential ingredient to warrant confiscation and penalty under the provisions of Rule 173Q(l)(a),(b) and (c) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 5. In view of the above discussions and following the ratio of the case l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
