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 →

Microland Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs and Service Tax, Bangalore

2016 (5) TMI 738 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Relinquishment of goods - Import of electric goods during 1995-96 - cleared under warehousing bill of entry and kept in warehouse - Seeked permission for re-export of goods after paying the penalties imposed - Appellant contended that Customs all along have been careless and the result has been that their part goods have been auctioned without any intimation to them and that remaining goods of 12 consignments were also not in the condition to be re-exported as they had all been opened as the goo .....

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 of Section 68 of the Customs Act 1962. - Decided in favour of appellant - C/557/2006-DB - Final Order No. 20274/2016 - Dated:- 12-2-2016 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member and Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member For the Appellant : Shri N. Anand, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Pakshi Rajan, AR ORDER Appellant is in appeal in respect of certain electric goods which he imported during 1995-96 though goods were cleared under warehousing bill of entry and kept in warehouse. This warehousi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Against the Commissioner (Appeals) order where he had remanded the matter to Assistant Commissioner, Department went in appeal before the Tribunal and Tribunal issued orders that the matter be decided by Commissioner (Appeals) himself as Commissioner did not have power to remand the case back for de novo consideration by the original adjudicating authority. 1.2. Commissioner (Appeals) passed another order confirming the original order of the lower authority wherein appellants were asked to pay d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

one for examination of the goods and they found out that out of the 16 bonded consignments/goods 4 consignments had already been auctioned by Customs without any intimation to them and remaining 12 consignments/goods were found to be in open condition. However the Assistant Commissioner in his order dated 07.04.2006 allowed the appellant to re-export the goods in consequence of Tribunal s order dated 08.02.2005 mentioned above. 1.2.1. The appellants point out that before the order was passed by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder-in-original dated 06.04.2006 passed by Assistant Commissioner. Against this order appellants are before this Tribunal. 2. The appellants mainly contend that Customs all along have been careless and the result has been that their part goods have been auctioned without any intimation to them and that remaining goods of 12 consignments were also not in the condition to be re-exported as they had all been opened as the goods were being readied to be auctioned. 3. Revenue represented by learned .....

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