9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 25th June, 2021. 2. The petitioner was intercepted while going to Afghanistan carrying certain medicines illegally and thus the petitioner was intercepted at the airport and proceedings initiated against him. After the adjudication an order was passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport, Terminal-3 as per which the value of the seized goods were re-determined as per Customs Valuation Rules at a discounted price which is less 20% of the MRP and was calculated at Rs. 90,50,174/- and thus the medicines worth Rs.90,50,174/- on the re-determined value were confiscated and a redemption fine of Rs.9 lakhs was imposed besides penalty of Rs.13 lakhs on the petitioner under Section 114 of the Customs Act. The petitioner has no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dditional Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport, the petitioner is required to deposit the penalty amount of Rs.13 lakhs and redemption fine of Rs.9 lakhs. 5. On a query raised by this Court as to whether the petitioner has filed an appeal against the order of the Additional Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport dated 20th January, 2021, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that no appeal has been filed. In case no appeal has been filed challenging the order of the learned Additional Commissioner of Customs, the order has attained finality and the petitioner who was found carrying medicines illegally is required to pay the penalty of Rs.13 lakhs which is a penalty in personam. 6. In view of this fact and particularly the fact th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other conditions. In the said case the petitioner was found in possession of foreign currency equivalent to Rs.65 lakhs from her hand baggage and the adjudication proceedings were still pending. This Court also considered the fact that the petitioner therein was aged, suffering from various ailments and was required to undergo medical check-up for which she was required to go to her country. The respondent in the said case had stated that they had no objection if the petitioner therein was permitted to travel abroad subject to her deposition of 50% of the amount, which was around Rs.32,30,000/- and in such condition this Court directed the petitioner therein to travel aboard to Taiwan on her depositing FDR in the sum of Rs.15 lakhs with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
