2011 (7) TMI 751

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... On examination of the sampled tested by the Textile Committee, it was found that the yarn is not high tenacity polyester yarn but medium tenacity yarn classifiable under heading 54024700. At the relevant time medium tenacity yarn classifiable under heading 54024700 was restricted and required import licence. The importer  in the meanwhile got the advance licences amended on 23.6.2009 to read item No.(1) as 54024700 instead of 54022000. The licences were for the quantities 10.1 MT and 7.07 MT of polyester filament yarn. The Order-in-Original was passed by the Addl.Commissioner of Customs who confiscated the goods under Sec.111(d) & (m) of the Customs Act and fine of Rs. 3 lakhs was imposed on the appellants.  He also imposed a pen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Tribunal in support of his contention that when there is no mala fide intention, there should not be any fine and penalty on the importer:- (1) Shree Ganesh International vs Commissioner of C.Excise, Jaipur  (2004 (174) ELT 171 (Tri-Del.)  In this case the Tribunal has held that declaration made on the Bill of Entry by appellant on basis of documents received by them from foreign supplier  not to be regarded as misdeclaration under Sec.111(m) of the Act and the Tribunal has held  that confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty is not warranted. (2) Kirti Sales Corpn.vs. CC, Faridabad (2008 (232) E.L.T. 151 (Tri-Del.) In this case the Tribunal has held that to constitute misdeclaration, the declarat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s established and goods are liable for confiscation under Sec.111(m) of the Customs Act.  He also submitted that the appellants did not submit correspondence made with the foreign supplier to support the claim that they were innocent in this case. The ld.D.R. also relied on the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Export), Chennai vs  Bansal Industries ( 2007(207) E.L.T. 346(Mad), wherein the facts and circumstances of the case are similar to the present case and in para 7 of the order, the High Court has held relying upon the Supreme Court decision in the case of Chairman, SEBI vs. Shriram Mutual Fund  that mens rea is not required for imposition of punishment under Customs Act and the Hi....