9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant Shri M. Selvakumar, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER Per : Shri P. Dinesha This appeal is filed against the Order--in--Appeal No. C.CUS. II No.568/2015 dated 26.06.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals--II), Chennai whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal thereby upholding the confiscation, reducing the redemption fine under Section 125 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shed officers was found to be carrying 'no label' whatsoever. This was brought to the notice of the appellant, the appellant appears to have indicated that they had already filed necessary application for registration under Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 [LMPC Rules, for short], but however they appear to have requested for adjudication without issuance of show cause notice an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he redemption fine and penalty as imposed by the Original Authority, but however the confiscation of goods under Section 111 (d) ibid was upheld. It is against the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the present appeal has been filed before this forum. 5. Section 111 (d) reads thus : "111. Confiscation of improperly imported goods, etc. The following goods brought from a place outsi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ility of the goods under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 as it is an 'improper', hence the appellant is also liable for penal action under Section 112 (a) of the Act. The Ld. Appellate Authority has also observed that it was only a procedural delay on the part of the appellant as the Registration Certificate was able to be obtained and produced later on i.e., after the arrival of the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
