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

2016 (9) TMI 273 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (9) TMI 273 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Imposition of Redemption fine - violation of restriction for unloading of appellant’s imported goods at Dighi Port. - import or Hot Briquetted Iron - Direct Reduced Iron - permission to be unloaded at Dighi Port as per Notification No. 01/2012-Cus.(NT) dated 31.01.2012 – contravention of Section 33 read with Section 8 of the Customs Act, 1962 – Held that: - When there was a restriction of unloading of goods at Dighi Port while filing the IGM and before pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. Maan, Assistant Commissioner (A.R) for respondent ORDER The fact of the case is that the appellant M/s. Arshiya Supply Chain Management Pvt. Ltd. having a Service Unit at Free Trade & Warehousing Zone (FTWZ-SEZ) of its parent company, Arshiya Limited located at Sai Village, Panvel, Raigad District, Maharashtra. The FTWZ was notified as Sector Specific Special Economic Zone by the Ministry of Commerce, Department of Commerce, Government of India, New Delhi under the provisions of Section 4 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing, weighment, survey etc. vide agreement dt. 20.5.2013. The appellant imported Hot Briquetted Iron (HBI) - Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) falling under HS Code No. 72031000 on behalf of Westford Trade Services Limited vide IGM No.1-08/SRN/2013-14 dt. 12.07.2013 and unloaded the goods on 16.07.2013 at Dighi Port by following the procedure laid down in the aforesaid sections. The Assistant Commissioner granted the permission for entry inwards for the cargo from the vessel and granted approval for unl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1995 and store them at Arshiya FTWZ within the Customs Area declared under Section 8 of the Customs Act, 1962 and also to transport the goods from Arshiya FTWZ for disposal/re-export. The same was accepted by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), M & P Wing, Alibag Division, Maharashtra. The appellant approached the Commissioner Customs, Marine Preventive, New Customs House, Mumbai for allowing transshipment under the provision of Rule 29 of SEZ Rules, 2006 to Arshiya FTWZ (port .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

emption fine amounting to ₹ 5,00,000/- under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 and penalty amounting to ₹ 4,00,000/- under Section 112(a) (i) of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant is before me. 2. Shri Navnit Chaudhary, Director of the appellant company appeared and submit that though the unloading of the captioned goods was not permitted at Dighi Port as per Notification No. 01/2012/NT dated 31.01.2012, but the appellant had no knowledge about s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mission for entry inwards for the cargo from the vessel and granted approval for unloading goods from the vessel at Dighi Port instead of raising any objection. Therefore in such case there is no fault of the appellant for unloading the cargo at Dighi Port. The unloading of cargo is not within the right of the appellant, it is only possible after permission of the Customs authorities. Therefore, if the Dighi Port is not allowed for unloading of cargo of the captioned goods the Custom authorities .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fillment of the provision made in Rule 18(5) of SEZ Rules, 2006. Therefore particularly in case of the goods is meant for bonding in the FTWZ Unit, restriction cannot be made applicable. 3. On the other hand, Shri D.S. Maan, Ld. Assistant Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that the fact is not under dispute that the appellants goods were restricted to be unloaded at Dighi Port. Therefore, whatsoever reason whether it i .....

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