TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 763X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no further reason to order confiscation for these goods and when there is no confiscation warranted, there cannot be any question of imposing any redemption fine. Consequently, the redemption fines imposed are set aside. Appeal allowed in part. - C/599/2008-DB - - - Dated:- 24-8-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member Shri N. Anand, Advocate for the appellant Shri Madhupsaran, Asst. Commisisoner ( AR ) for the respondent ORDER Per : Ashok K. Arya The appellant, M/s. AXA Business Services (P) Ltd., Bangalore, is in appeal against the Order-in-original No.09/2008 dt. 12/05/2008 where under inter alia the demand of duty of ₹ 19,94,512/- along with imposition of redemp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of LCD projector bonded vide Bond No.121/2002, it was noticed that the same was not available in the bonded warehouse. On enquiry, it was found that the said projector was sent for repairs without intimation to the Department. viii. On further verification, the Department observed that Unit had imported Smoke Detector, Fire Alarm system (safety devices), which are not covered by the Notification No.140/91 dt. 22/10/1991 and No.52/03-Cus dt. 31/03/2003 and the said items were not eligible for import without payment of duty. On being pointed out the liabilities, the appellant paid the duty of ₹ 18,56,602/- and interest of ₹ 34,653/- on 22/06/2006 in respect of goods that had become obsolete and not put to intended use. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification in question. v. The provisions of Section 72 of the Customs Act, 1962 are not attracted for demanding duty on capital goods in question. vi. Capital goods listed in Annexure A B are of the notice (SCN) still warehoused goods and warehousing period of the same has not expired. Therefore the provisions of Section 72 are not attracted for confirming the duty. vii. The capital goods in question at Annexure A B of the show-cause notice are warehoused goods as defined in Section 2(44) of the customs Act, 1962 and charging Section 12 itself is not attracted for these goods and duty cannot be demanded. viii. Taxable event in the case of warehoused goods occurs only when the goods are de-bonded and a Bill of Entry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conditions of the notification. The appellant has maintained proper accounts of removal and receipt of goods. Procedural infirmities cannot come in the way of granting exemption. xvi. The imposition of redemption fine of ₹ 20 lakhs is bad and is not tenable in law. The impugned order has not stated the manner in which the said fine is fixed/determined when the Department is saying that the goods became obsolete. xvii. There is no evidence to prove dishonest intention and deliberate intention to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellant, therefore imposition of penalty is illegal. 5. The learned AR for the Revenue vehemently pleads for sustaining the demand, redemption fine and penalty imposed by the impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
