TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 603X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was imposed on the respondent. It is submitted that the respondent has paid the duty as well as the above penalty and is not contesting these issues any further. In para-7 of the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) it is noted that respondent has paid up the entire duty demanded as well as penalty imposed by the original authority. In spite of payment of duty and penalty, the Commissioner (Appeals) has directed for remand for the matter on the basis of the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [ 2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT] . When the entire duty and penalty has been paid up by the respondent, there are no grounds to re-examine as to whether the SIIB was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Canon India Vs Commissioner of Customs [2021 (376) ELT 3 (SC)], the matter requires to be remanded. The Department has therefore filed the present appeal aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) remanding the matter to the original authority. 2. Ld. A.R Ms. Anandalakshmi Ganesh Ram appeared and argued for the Department (Appellant). She reiterated the grounds of appeal. She submitted that the show cause notice dated 11.01.2019 is issued by the Joint Commissioner of Customs (SIIB) and the case has been adjudicated by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-III Commissionerate. While deciding the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has taken a technical ground by referring to the judgeme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard both sides. 5. On perusal of the order passed by the adjudicating authority in para-63, the demand raised in the SCN reads as under : I. The duty amount of Rs.22,77,047/- should not be demanded in respect of Bill of Lading NO.NYKSNB6EO1026400 dated 03.11.2016, for the pilfered on the determined value of Rs.1,19,44,462/- in terms of Section 45 (3) of Customs Act, 1962. II. Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 should not be imposed on them for allowing removal of containers without proper customs clearance and thereby rendering the goods liable for confiscation. 6. As per the OIO No.78721/2020 dated 29.12.2020 duty amount of Rs.22,77,047/- was confirmed. On the very same investigation, the respondent was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
