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

2016 (11) TMI 1269 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (11) TMI 1269 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Confiscation of imported ship - Import of ship in violation of ITC provisions - the appellant vide letter dated 20.09.2004 requested the revenue to allow the said vessel to be scrapped and broken, and sought permission to file a bill of entry for this purpose. Since Marmagoa port, where the bill of entry was filed, was not designated port for braking up of ships, the revenue rejected the application for such conversion and adjudged the issue as per ITC .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not in working condition therefore, appellant had obtained a permission to tow the tanker from Marmagoa to Alang - It can be seen from the definition that the term “vessel” includes any ship, boat, sailing vessel or other description of vessel used in navigation. Motor tanker would be covered in the definition of vessel - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Appeal No.C/803/05 - Order No.A/93143/16/CB - Dated:- 29-9-2016 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri Raju, Member .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ance was sought as the vessel being imported was of 1969 make and age of vessel was more than 25 years. In response to these demands of revenue, the appellant vide letter dated 20.09.2004 requested the revenue to allow the said vessel to be scrapped and broken, and sought permission to file a bill of entry for this purpose. Since Marmagoa port, where the bill of entry was filed, was not designated port for braking up of ships, the revenue rejected the application for such conversion and adjudged .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellant are before Tribunal. 2. Ld. counsel for the appellant argued that no show-cause notice has been issued. He argued that in terms of Section 124 it is not open to revenue to confiscate without issue of show-cause notice even if the appellant has specifically waived the show-cause notice. He further argued that motor tanker imported by them is not a vessel as it cannot be navigated. 3. Ld. AR relies on the impugned order. 4. We have gone through the rival submissions, we find that sect .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty; (b) is given an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the grounds of confiscation or imposition of penalty mentioned therein; and (c) is given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter: Provided that the notice referred to in clause (a) and the representation referred to in clause (b) may at the request of the person concerned be oral. Proviso to the said section clearly indicates that the importer .....

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