1998 (2) TMI 373

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Thiagaraj, SDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : T.P. Nambiar, Member (J)]. -  This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in Order No. 64/97, dated 25-7-1997. In terms of that Order, he confirmed the confiscation of the goods but reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 30 lacs. The facts of the case are that the lower authorities held....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....filed Bill of Entry for spectacle front piece and spectacle sides. But on the advice of the supplier, the appellant placed an order for entire lot of 7500 numbers packed in strong non-perforated zip lock. It was his contention that by no stretch of imagination, same can be treated as finished spectacle frames. The goods are only parts and have to be subject to substantial finishing operations befo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... applicants are not entitled to avail the benefit of Notification No. 204/92, dated 19-5-1992 as what was imported are spectacles frames and not the parts. 6. The next question for consideration is whether the goods are liable to be re-exported. In this connection, the ld. Advocate drew our attention to the letter of the foreign supplier dated 20-9-1996 wherein they stated that they have o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e at Rs. 600/- per frame. But the adjudicating authority stated that there was market enquiry. But no such market enquiry was made known to the appellants. Therefore, fixing the price of Rs. 800/- by the adjudicating authority and Rs. 600/- by the Commissioner (Appeals) for each frame on the basis market enquiry which was not intimated to the appellants is not sustainable. The appellants in this c....