Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the demand of duty, penalty and confiscation in respect of marine containers was sustainable where the appellant claimed compliance with the re-export condition under Notification No. 104/94.
Analysis: The notification granted exemption to imported marine containers subject to their re-export within six months. The appellant accepted liability for two containers whose re-export could not be established. For the remaining containers, the Tribunal accepted the evidence of re-export, holding that the multi modal transport documents and supporting affidavits were sufficient in the circumstances. It further held that penalty and confiscation were not warranted merely because some containers were not satisfactorily accounted for, especially where the object of the notification was to facilitate the movement of containers in international trade.
Conclusion: The demand was set aside for the four containers found to have been re-exported, and the penalty and confiscation were also set aside; liability remained only for the two containers not proved to have been re-exported.