TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (11) TMI 580
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dismissed the stay applications and appeals vide Stay Order No. 368 to 386/99 and Final Order No. 454 to 472/99 dated 1-3-1999 on account of the fact that the appellants had not rectified the defects pointed out to them. Later, the appellants filed Miscellaneous applications for recall of the order and vide Miscellaneous Order No. 912-920/99 dated 30-9-1999 the order of dismissal of stay applications and appeals dismissing them was recalled and the same had been directed to list for hearing afresh today. In the said Miscellaneous order, it was noted that the appellants had filed Writ Petitions against the orders of the impugned authorities and the High Court in terms of the Writ Petitions filed had directed them to furnish bank guarantee f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e examination report, as he could not find any visible imperfections such as pinholes and defective cutting or the surface of the sample plates/sheets. The appellants had submitted before the Additional Collector that there is no variety as Tinplate Seconds in the international parlance and that visual examination cannot be right guide to come to the conclusion as to the nature of the goods. Another point raised was that similar items have been imported for a long time and have been allowed clearance regularly and that there is no warrant to change the practice. The Additional Collector has not accepted this plea including citations relied upon on the ground that there is no such variety of Tinplate Seconds, as could be seen from the Techni....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; - Rs. 16,800/- 4. M/s. V.V.V. Anandam & Bros. - Rs. 2,500/- 5. M/s. Sivakami Metals - Rs. 3,600/- 6. M/s. Kanagavel Trading Co. - Rs. 17,500/- 7. M/s. T.A.M.S. Natarajan Bros. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lenient view by imposing redemption fine of only 10%, which is just and proper in the matter. He submits that in respect of other 11 parties, the appeals and stay applications are required to be dismissed for non-compliance of the High Court order and their stay applications and appeals cannot be heard. 5. The learned counsel concedes the position with regard to the other 11 parties, who have not complied with the terms of the High Court order. He submits that stay and appeals could be disposed of on the basis of his submissions. 6. On a careful consideration of the submissions and on a perusal of the records, we notice that the appeals and stay applications were restored subject to the appellants' producing proof of compliance ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is conclusion, then the order of confiscation on the ground that the ITC Policy has been violated is justified. The only question is required to be considered is quantum of redemption fine to be imposed in the matter. We note that the Additional Commissioner has already taken a lenient view and no penalty has been imposed. However, taking into consideration the plea that the appellants are only actual users and they have not sold the goods, the plea for redemption fine is considerable. Therefore, taking into consideration of the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we reduce the fines in respect of the 8 parties to the extent indicated below :- S.No. Name of the Party Amount Rs. 1. &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; 2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) 6. M/s. Kanagavel Trading Co. 12,000/- (Rupees Twelve thousand only) 7. M/s. T.A.M.S. Natarajan Bros. &n....