TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (5) TMI 513
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rted RBD Palm Oil and cleared the same on 10 Bills of Entry. Visit by the Central Excise officers to the factory premises of one M/s. Steel and Metal Works, Sahibabad in July, 1979, in pursuance of intelligence, resulted in their noticing huge stocks of empty drums painted in red; that some of the drums were converted into sheets by flattening the drum bodies after cutting and separating the tops and bottoms; that the drums belong to applicant No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as importers); and that some of the converted sheets of the drums were sent to other companies for re-rolling. On further intelligence the Central Excise officers visited the factory premises of the importer and found huge stocks of empty magnetic and non-magnetic drums,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er dated 8-8-1996 [1996 (86) E.L.T. 460 (S.C.)] the Supreme Court allowed the appeal. The Supreme Court set aside the Delhi High Court judgment and directed continuance of proceedings pursuant to the show cause notice under Sections 28 and 124 and that the drums shall remain in seizure but in the premises of the importers. As the notices could not be adjudicated, the importers filed an interim application for directions before the Supreme Court, which vide its order dated 23-4-2001 directed disposal of the adjudication pending before the Commissioner of Customs, Bombay within three months. Noticees demanded supply of relied upon documents and of all that were available, only part of the relied upon documents could be supplied and in the mea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... other two applicants, who are Directors of the importers, in terms of Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962; hence these applications. 4. We have heard Shri Harish Chander, learned Sr. Counsel for the applicants and Shri Shukla, learned SDR for the Revenue. Both sides confirm that the goods are still in the custody of the customs authorities as the option for redemption has not been exercised by the importers. The learned Counsel for the importers also undertakes not to redeem the goods during the pendency of these appeals. On the basis of the above our order is confined to pre-deposit of penalties, in the light of the language of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962, which provides that - "Wherein any appeal under this Chapt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ible to the benefit of exemption from duty under Notification 184-Cus., dated 2-8-1976 and that the adjudicating authority has wrongly held that the notification required the importers to make a declaration about the nature of the packing material, namely, that the packages are normally used in trade for packing the goods therein, that the packages are not of permanent character and accordingly strong enough to be suitable for repeated use and that their value is included in the value for which the goods contained therein have been invoiced. Our attention is drawn to Public Notice No. 90, dated 6-9-1979, which for the first time, enjoined upon the importers to file such declaration along with Bill of Entry in order to avail of the benefit o....