TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t items in question i.e. 406 pieces of Artistic Brass Artware were purchased by Ms. Sarl Ganesha Enterprises, France through their Manager Mr. Deonl who had visited India and were handed over in packed condition to the appellants for sending/exporting the same to them in France and as such, the appellants had no knowledge that those were obscene. Similarly, regarding misdeclaration of 177 dozen boxes of incense sticks, the appellants did know about it, as these were also purchased and then handed over to the appellants by the above said company in packed condition for dispatching them to France. The appellants acted in a bona fide manner and as such, no penalty could be imposed on them under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act. The learned Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Soap was only due to a typographical mistake committed by the seller of the goods and the appellants had no role to play therein. Therefore, the penalty imposed on the appellants is unjustifiable and deserves to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the learned SDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order and contended that since on matching the male and female Artistic brass pieces, obscenity has been found and there was a misdeclaration of other goods, the impugned order regarding confiscation and imposition of penalty has been correctly passed. 5. I have heard both the sides and gone through the record. From the record, it is evident that the appellants from the very beginning had taken the stand that the seized goods i. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shipping bills which were mentioned in the accompanying invoices. It may also be stated that no show cause notice was issued to M/s. Sarl Ganesh Enterprises France when the appellants disclosed the entire facts during the investigation and disclosed their name as a real purchaser of the goods from India. The appellants have neither purchased the goods nor claimed ownership of the same. The impugned order regarding the imposition of penalty on the appellants in the light of discussion made above, is liable to be set aside. 6. The question as to whether 406 pieces of Artistic Brass Artware are obscene or not, is not required to be gone into in the present appeal as the appellants have not claimed ownership of the goods. The goods were not e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
