TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi whereby the Tribunal while considering the matter of the appellant has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant. Counsel for the appellant has contended that while admitting the matter on 23-2-2011, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law : (i) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that a case for penalty/confiscation under Sections 111 and 112 of the Customs Act is made out on the facts brought on record by the Revenue? Counsel for the appellant has taken us to the contention which has been raised in para 19 of the appeal memo which reads as under : 19. That the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N. Director of CHA has stated that bill of entry along with documents was filed for clearance of 10 nos. of second-hand looms which were reported to be old that Shri R.B. Shah was requested to examine and submit his report with regard to 10 looms which he submitted after examination of those looms stacked at the gate of both the containers. Shri R.B. Shah in his statement dated 20-9-2002 inter alia stated that he inspected the looms on 18-9-2002 on the request of Shri Hitendra N., that the looms were second-hand; that he did not inspect the Jacquard machines as he was asked to inspect only 10 looms as this was his only term of reference; that marking 11/1988 on flanges could be year of manufacture of that part. Shri Pradeep Chugh of SGS in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 16-10-2002 is under the influence of the investigating officers. Our doubt is further substantiated by his acts when he acted as per the directions and wishes of the customs officers in arranging fax message from M/s. Sulzer dated 2-10-2002 allegedly having confirmed delivery of machines of S. Nos. 125012-125019 to China in 1993 and S. Nos. 125191-125192 to Germany in 1993. It is not understood as to why such an important investigation having vital bearing on the case was not made by the customs authorities themselves from Indian Embassy. Since such an important document has not been procured by the customs authorities through proper channel, there is every possibility that the telefax has been arranged to implicate us with some motive kn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) in lieu of confiscation under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, in terms of the bond executed by the importer. (ii) I confiscate the 6 nos. new Eltex Jacquards, which were found to be misdeclared as old used and which were seized on 3-12-2002, under Section 111(f) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, since the same had already been released provisionally as per Hon ble High Court s order, I impose fine of ₹ 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) in lieu of confiscation under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, in terms of the bond executed by the importer. (iii) The Eltex Jacquards are eligible for benefit of Serial No. 251(1) of the Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. and accordingly, the duty should be r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
