2002 (4) TMI 668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ani, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. -  By this appeal the appellant is challenging the order of confiscation of the goods and imposition of redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/- and penalty of Rs. 10,000/-. The appellant filed shipping Bill No. 09944, dated 20-7-95 for export of 40 MTs of stainless steel circles of AISI 304 grade of thickness declared as 0.8 mm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt in the DEEC had been issued by DGFT and the matter requires to be re-adjudicated in view of the DGFT having validly endorsed and amended the licence to justify the export of the goods which were physically checked. On remand the Commissioner noted that originally the appellant had misdeclared the goods and therefore there was violation of provision to Section 113 of the Customs Act. Hence the f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Hon'ble High Court has laid down that the conduct of the party and/or attending extenuating circumstances are material and relevant factors to be taken into consideration by imposition fine and penalty. It has also been noted that merely because action against goods is action in rem it does not mean that a person who had committed no offence in respect of them or with reference to them could b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... exported the goods which was not in terms of the licence. 4. On a careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides the Tribunal originally by Order No. 725/97, dated 14-3-97 have clearly accepted the appellant's plea that the mistake had occurred on account of DGFT in recording incorrect details in the licence as against their application. Tribunal also noted the amended li....