Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1990 (1) TMI 73

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the quantum of redemption fine. The Appellate Tribunal was bound to consider those facts and circumstances in determining the quantum of redemption fine. Moreso, because the Tribunal had itself observed that the Collector's order imposing redemption fine of Rupees five crores was not based on any material, but it refused to consider the reduction of redemption fine merely on the ground that the importers had failed to place additional material other than those which had already been considered by the High Court and the Supreme Court while determining the legality of the import. In our opinion the Tribunal committed apparent error in refusing to take into account the extenuating circumstances leading to the import of the disputed goods for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... could not be imported by the petitioners. The High Court further held that the Collector of Customs (Kandla) had jurisdiction to confiscate the goods and to release the same to the petitioners by imposing redemption fine. As regards the question of quantum of redemption fine the High Court directed the Appellate Tribunal to consider the same in appeal. Pursuant to the order of the High Court the appeal against the order of the Collector was entertained and heard by the Appellate Tribunal, Bombay. There was difference of opinion between two members of the Tribunal at Bombay, the appeal was then referred to a Full Bench of the Tribunal at Delhi. The Full Bench of Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi considered the matter and passed the impugned o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the matter to the Appellate Tribunal but only on the question of consideration of quantum of redemption fine. The Appellate Tribunal would hear and dispose of this matter as if it was hearing an appeal filed by the petitioner but only on the question of quantum of redemption fine. I having held that the order of confiscation of that point or other points being re-opened before the Appellate Tribunal. It will only hear and decide the question of quantum of redemption fine. Of course, it will be open to the petitioner and the Collector to place before the Appellate Tribunal any relevant material of facts necessary for this purpose so as to enable to decide this question in accordance with law." Pursuant to the above directions, the Appellat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e goods on the belief that `industrial coconut oil' was not a canalised item and their belief was founded on a number of facts and circumstances including the letter of State Trading Corporation, order of Central Government under Section 131(3) of the Customs Act and the clearance of petitioners' own goods by the Collector (Bombay). The petitioners further pointed out that along with the petitioners disputed goods two other importers had also imported `industrial coconut oil' and in those cases the Tribunal had reduced the quantum of redemption fine viz. in the case of Jayant Oil Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bombay and M/s. Allana Impex (P) Ltd., Bombay. The petitioners submitted that their case was similar to those cases, therefore, the Tribunal shoul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... those facts and circumstances in determining the quantum of redemption fine. Moreso, because the Tribunal had itself observed that the Collector's order imposing redemption fine of Rupees five crores was not based on any material, but it refused to consider the reduction of redemption fine merely on the ground that the importers had failed to place additional material other than those which had already been considered by the High Court and the Supreme Court while determining the legality of the import. In our opinion the Tribunal committed apparent error in refusing to take into account the extenuating circumstances leading to the import of the disputed goods for purposes of determining the quantum of redemption fine. 6. While determining .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates