2009 (10) TMI 749

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., I take up the appeal. 2. The respondent-corporation had imported four consignments of Guitar and filed equal number of Bills of Entry for clearance of the goods valued at Rs. 8,67,231/-. The Asst. Commissioner of Customs found that the importer was not possessed of Import-Export Code (IEC) in terms of para 2.12 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2004-09 read with Section 7 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. On this basis, the AC confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act read with Section 11 of the FT(D&R) Act. He, however, allowed redemption of the goods against payment of fine of Rs. 2 lakhs under Section 125 of the Customs Act. The AC also imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the importer under S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atia v. CCE, 2003 (155) E.L.T. 423 (S.C.) with regard to the scope of the expression "prohibition" was relied on by this Tribunal in Molok Boloky case. The ld. SDR has also referred to the Supreme Court judgments in Sheikh Mohd. Omer v. CC, Calcutta, 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1439 (S.C.) and CCE v. Suresh Jhunjhunwala, 2006 (203) E.L.T. 353 (S.C.), in the context of submitting that "prohibition" includes any restriction imposed under the Customs Act or any other law for the time being in force. It is his submission that Section 7 of the FT(D&R) Act prohibited import of goods by any person without IEC. Under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, any goods which are imported contrary to any prohibition imposed by or under this Act or "any other law for t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder Section 112 of the Customs Act. The respondent voluntarily paid the fine imposed by the Asst. Commissioner under Section 125 of the Act in lieu of confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) of the Act. They also voluntarily paid the penalty imposed by the Asst. Commissioner under Section 112 of the Act. This being the factual position, no issue survives as to whether Section 111(d) was applicable or not. Its applicability has been canvassed by the appellant and conceded by the respondent. The only question which remains to be addressed is with regard to the quanta of fine and penalty. As already noted the respondent has no grievance with regard to the quanta of fine and penalty imposed by the Asst. Commissioner albeit without juris....