TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 446
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the value of the goods was mentioned as US$ 37,507. The consignment was sought to be cleared under an advance licence dated 22-3-2002 issued in the name of the said company and with the benefit of duty exemption under Customs Notification No. 48/99 dated 29-4-99. The Bill of Entry declared the value of the goods as US$ 39803.66 CIF for the purpose of assessment and, accordingly, the assessable value of the goods was Rs. 18,49,278/-. The importer executed a bond undertaking to comply with the conditions of the above Notification. Upon assessment of the goods, the party paid an amount of Rs. 925/- on 10-9-2003 towards Cess. But they did not come forward to clear the goods for a long time. The consignment was inspected by officers of SIIB on 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act and for imposition of penalty on the party under Section 112 of the Act. The noticee did not reply to the notice, nor did they attend the personal hearings offered by the Commissioner. M/s. Ishwar Impex, Bangalore (appellants herein) made a representation dated 28-3-2005 through their counsel before the Commissioner stating that (a) the supplier (Chinese party) had recalled the original documents from the bank and issued revised documents in their name (M/s. Ishwar Impex) (b) the supplier had, in a letter dated 12-12-2003, requested the Commissioner for permission to amend the import documents (c) they (M/s. Ishwar Impex) had also made a similar request to the Commissioner in their letter dated 31-7-2004 (d) they had paid sale consider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; I order the confiscation of goods totally valued at Rs. 18,49,278/- under Section 111(m) and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, I give the option to M/s. Sandip Exports Ltd., Kolkata to redeem the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty lakhs only). 4. I impose a penalty of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight lakhs only) on M/s. Sandip Exports Ltd., Kolkata under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. 5. I repudiate the claim of request for change of title made by M/s. Ishwar Im-pext, Bangalore in respect of the subject goods." 2. Learned Senior Advocate representing the appellants submitted that M/s. Sandip Exports Ltd. had fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able duty and interest as above in addition to the fine. The option of redemption of goods can be availed by M/s. Adani Exports Ltd. in terms of the Hon'ble High Court order dated 29-10-2004 by production of original Bill of Lading and also payment of necessary charges viz., duty, interest and fine detailed above." 3. Learned Senior Advocate submitted that the appellants are in a similar position as that of M/s. Adani Exports Ltd. and, therefore, they should be allowed to redeem the subject goods on payment of duty (with interest) and reasonable fine. It was submitted that, in the case of Adani Exports Ltd., the Commissioner had determined a fine of only Rs. 3.5 lakhs in lieu of confiscation of goods valued at Rs. 35.5 lakhs. In the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and requested the Commissioner to release the goods to them. Unless the appellants paid the sale proceeds to the supplier through the bank, they would not be allowed by the bank to retire the documents. Obviously, the appellants became entitled to claim ownership of the goods. Substantially the same situation was obtaining in the case of M/s. Adani Exports Ltd. Therefore, we have to accept the claim raised by the appellants on the strength of Order-in-Original No. 3567/2005 ibid. 6. The appellants have already undertaken to pay appropriate Customs duty and redemption fine for obtaining release of the goods. Hence they are liable to pay the differential duty of Rs. 20,34,882/- (with interest thereon in terms of Section 28AB of the C....