2006 (4) TMI 387

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y, the importers procured certificates required for a EOU to clear restricted goods under the benefit of exemption available to an EOU from duty and licence to import such goods. For the other two Bills of Entry, no such documents were produced. Only the two Bills of Entry were assessed, inasmuch as from the documents enclosed, it is seen that they have endorsements that transit bond for transferring, after waiver of physical warehousing. The said goods were obtained from the Bond Department of Custom House and duty has been calculated and S40 file number entered. 3. Due to certain disputes, which arose within the CHA, importer indentors, the goods could not be cleared from the Bombay Docks non-clearance was also on account of non-r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e would call for a liability of penalty under Section 112 (a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. Since these two activities alone, by themselves will not render such goods liable to confiscation. The liability to confiscation in this case emanates from the production of an ineligible procurement certificate of an EOU. There is no finding as to how this appellant had any role to play as regards procurement of this certificate. The penalty imposed on this appellant has therefore to be set aside. 6. As regards the penalty imposed on appellant Shri Sanjeev Kapoor, the findings arrived at by the Commissioner do not bring out as to how he was concerned with the procurement of certificates which have rendered the goods liable to confiscation und....