TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (10) TMI 552
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Appellant. Shri Navneet, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. [Order per : Ashok Jindal, Member (J)]. - The applicants are seeking waiver of pre-deposit of the penalties imposed on them under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that the main importer M/s. Tangerine Informatique Pvt. Ltd., imported certain goods, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter was adjudicated and the imported goods were absolutely confiscated and the penalty on the applicant under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act have been imposed. 4. The ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that in this case it is an admitted fact that the importer had declared the goods as per the invoice raised by the foreign supplier and on examination it was found that the goods were ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt was exonerated; therefore, penalties on both the applicants are not imposable. 5. Stay applications of the applicants were strongly opposed by the Additional Commissioner (AR) and submits that although the proceedings under FERA has been dropped against the applicant but admittedly they have mis-declared the goods as the same were not found as declared at the time of inspection. He furt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds, the importer has declared the goods as per the invoice in the bill of entry and the goods were cleared. Later on, on examination the goods were found as obsolete and dummy I.C. as per the test report of the IIT. Thereafter, the applicants proceeded the matter with foreign supplier, who admitted the fault that the some other goods had been supplied wrongly to the importer. Therefore, prim....