TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e taken the facts in Customs Application No. 27 of 2002. In this case, the respondent had imported various consignments of raw/rough marble blocks and sought clearance under the Customs Tariff Heading 2515.12. The Commissioner of Customs found that the goods imported were in violation of the import policy and by the Order-in-Original dated 31-8-2001 and 13-9-2001, the Commissioner confiscated the goods imported by the Respondent under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, the Commissioner of Customs gave an option to the Respondents to redeem the goods on payment of fine and penalty as more particularly set out in the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai. 3.Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 112(a) by the Commissioner of Customs, Jawahar Customs House, Nhava Sheva and reducing them to Rs. 7,50,000/- and Rs. 2,00,000/- respectively without examining the facts of the case ?" 4.Mr. Desai, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submitted that the Tribunal neither in the present case nor in its earlier decision which has been relied upon in the present case given any reasons for reducing the redemption fine and penalty. He submitted that the Tribunal blindly followed its decision in the case of the Stonemann Marble Industries's and even the said decision does not lay down any principles or ratio as to how and under what circumstances and to what extent the redemption fine and penalty imposed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revenue. He submitted that after having implemented the order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has filed the Reference applications in all those cases as an afterthought and only with a view to delay the refund amount due to the Respondents on account of reduction in redemption fine and penalty. He submitted that as the Customs authorities failed to implement the order of the Tribunal, the respondents were compelled to file a Writ Petition bearing Nos. 4124 of 2002 in this Court. He submitted that the issues raised in the present application are squarely covered by the various decisions of the Tribunal and the Apex Court and, therefore, the Reference Applications filed by the Revenue are liable to be dismissed and the Respondents must be g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
