9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esent appeal is directed against Order dated 10.04.2015, passed by the Commissioner (Customs), Delhi. The appellant imported a consignment of mobile phones and filed a Bill of Entry No. 8802517 dated 4.04.2015, declaring the import goods as unbranded mobile phones. On examination of consignment by Customs. It was found to contain goods as below: S. No. Item Declared as per BE Item found as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nhanced and the importer has paid Custom Duty at the enhanced value. Further, the adjudicating authority took the view that the importer has mis-declared the import goods, and hence he ordered confiscation of the same under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. An option to redeem was given on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 8 lakhs. A penalty of Rs. 2,12,632/- was imposed under Section 114 A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that the brand names were obscure and not well known. 5. Ld. Departmental Representative reiterated the findings of the Original Adjudicating Authority. 6. The enhancement of value has not been challenged by the appellant and hence the same is not being discussed in this order. The case of Revenue is that the import goods have been declared as unbranded mobile phones; however the goods on ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
