1997 (7) TMI 457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Rs. 15,000/- within specified time limit, which is purposely delayed. 1. The facts of the case are that the Respondent filed the Bill of Entry No. 6683, dated 22-4-1993 for clearance of office furniture, whose value was assessed at Rs. 9,450/- by the dock staff on first check examination. It falls in the negative list of Import Policy 1992-97, being a consumer goods. Respondent was called upon to explain as to why it should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and why personal penalty should not be imposed under the Customs Act, 1962 provisions. On 12-5-1993 by letter and in personal hearing, Respondent explained that the said goods were gifted to them as free technical and trade samples by foreign su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....so any export in hand. Goods imported are consumer goods. Import by a manufacturer of metal sheets is not-justified. His intention to manufacture and export furniture is not substantiated. Items cannot be considered as bona fide samples to attract para 98 of Chapter V of Hand Book of Procedure 1992-97. The learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that any importer can import Technical and Trade Samples, within the permissible limit as per the above provision. Respondent is only the manufacturer of pre-coated metal coils and sheets of different colours. It is not his case that he is manufacturer of furniture. It is not required to be proved. Appellant cannot import meaning which is not stipulated in the Policy. The provision of para 98 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ld not be stretched against a tax payer. The construction which would leave without effect any part of the language of statute will normally be rejected as per 1989 (44) E.L.T. 613 (S.C.) in the case of Aphali Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Maharashtra. 3. The point to be considered is whether there are sufficient and satisfactory grounds to set aside the impugned order ? My findings thereon is in the negative. 4. Perused the Order-in-Original dated 12-5-1993 and Order-in-Appeal dated 29-9-1993, appeal memorandum, cross-objection and para 98 of Chapter V of Hand Book of Procedure in respect of item X in para 98 which states that "subject to compliance with the provisions of any other law for the time being in force, imports may als....