2007 (2) TMI 569

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant. Shri Samir Chitkara, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. -  These appeals arise out of Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 103 & 104/2003 (19 & 20-KDL)Cus/Commr(A)/Ahd., dated 5th June, 2003 which have upheld the Orders-in-Original No. KDL/JT. Commr/Inder Singh/12/2001, dated 15-10-2001. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts in brief are....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e transshipment from Mumbai and the goods were confiscated by the original authority and offered redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 60,000/-. After denying the benefit of Sections 86(2) and 87 of Customs Act, 1962, duty was demanded. He also imposed penalty on the appellant company and on Shri Suresh G. Kewalramani, the other appellant. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assistant Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oms authorities at Kandla as competent to decide on the eligibility or otherwise of duty free receipt of the material by the ship at Kandla Port though permitted by Mumbai Customs authorities. As regards demand of duty on 15 HT of Diesel Oil and 1200 litres of Lubricant oil. Which was in ship at the time of arrival he submitted that the demand is also time barred. 6. We have carefully cons....