TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 114(i) of the Customs Act, as claimed. Nothing has been pointed out how the goods can be said to be prohibited goods. Even otherwise, it is required to be noted that there is a clear finding recorded by the learned Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court that the respondent did not claim any draw back benefit. When the Revenue is not in a position to even satisfy this Court that the case wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned judgment and order dated 31.07.2008 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in Customs Case No. 5 of 2008, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the Revenue in not interfering with the order passed by the Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [for short the Tribunal ) setting aside the penalty imposed under Section 114(iii) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut how the goods can be said to be prohibited goods. Even otherwise, it is required to be noted that there is a clear finding recorded by the learned Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court that the respondent did not claim any draw back benefit. 5. In view of the above, when the Revenue is not in a position to even satisfy this Court that the case would fall under Section 114(i) of the Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
