TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 469X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1962 and ordered re-export of the same goods and also imposed penalty of ₹ 1,35,000/- on appellant under Section 112 (a) of Customs Act, 1962. Held that: - I find that ordering of confiscation and again ordering re-export of confiscated goods is contrary to each other. On absolute confiscation, the goods became property of Government of India and appellant does not have any authority to export the same - confiscation of goods upheld with imposition of redemption fine of 15% of assessable value - imposition of penalty upheld to 10% of assessable value - the applicable duty on the assessable value shall be payable if the goods are taken/released on payment of Customs duty, redemption fine and penalty. The goods shall be release ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red confiscation of the goods imported under Section 111(d) (o) of the Customs Act, 1962 and gave an option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 2,75,000/- under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 and ordered re-export of the same goods and also imposed penalty of ₹ 1,35,000/- on appellant under Section 112 (a) of Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original, appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), Noida who passed Order-in-Appeal No. NOI/CUSTM/000/APP/405/2014-15 dated 23.03.2015 holding that he did not find any infirmity in the Original Authority s order for confiscation of goods, imposition of redemption fine and order for re-export of the goods, and accordingly, rejected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not require permission of MoEF, absolute confiscation thereof is not warranted. It was also held that the goods were allowed clearance on redemption fine of 15% of the assessable value and penalty of 10% of the of the assessable value. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant took me through the relied upon final order No. 51473 of 2015 dated 08.04.2015 in the case of M/s. Jibran Overseas vs. C.C., Ghaziabad passed by Division Bench of this Tribunal and compared their case with the relied upon case laws under similar facts and circumstances and urged that the said case law is squarely applicable to their present case. 4. Learned D.R. relied upon the impugned Order-in-Original and Order- in-Appeal. 5. I have carefully gone t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
