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 →

M/s Rajesh Kumar, Raj Kumar, Arjun Kumar, Ram Kumar, Ganesh Kumar, Raman Kumar Versus C.C. New Delhi (Air cargo export)

2016 (6) TMI 225 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Import of button cells and watch parts through post parcel - Mis-declaration of goods - Confiscation of seized goods - Imposition of redemption fine and penalty - Held that:- it is an admitted facts that the goods were imported through EMS Speed Post .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ne and penalty are not in conformity with the statutory provisions followed by Sandhya Jewelers vs Comm. of Customs (Ahmadabad) [2013 (8) TMI 779 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD]. - Decided in favour of appellant - C/53230/2014-C[SM], C/53228/2014-C[SM], C/53490/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ER The appellants have filed these appeals against the impugned orders dated 24.03.2014, 26.03.2014 and 31.03.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi. In the impugned order dated 26.03.2014 and 31.03.2014, the Ld. Commissioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

MS speed post were examined by the officers of SIIB branch of Export Commissionerate. On examination, it was detected that button cell and watch parts were contained in the imported parcel, instead of house hold articles as declared by the importers. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d goods were confiscated, with the option to the importer to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine. Besides, penalties were imposed on the appellants by the adjudicating authority in terms of Section 112(a) of the Act. In appeal, the Ld. Comm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

resent dispute. 3. Sh. V. S. Negi, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that goods imported through post parcel are not liable for seizure/ confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 and accordingly, no redemption fine an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai reported in 2005 (189) ELT 415 (Tri. Chennai). 4. On the other hand, Sh. G.R. Singh the Ld. DR appearing for the Respondent reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and relied on the decision of this .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ard the Ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records. 6. It is an admitted facts that the goods were imported through EMS Speed Post, which were not liable to seizure/ confiscation in terms of Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since 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

 

 

 

 

 

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